 I see Bruce in the attendees, so I'm going to move him. He didn't want any special treatment tonight. Hopefully it's going to come on over. Sometimes I click these buttons, but things don't happen. Let's try it again. Here he comes. So Pam, are we good to go? Not quite, not quite. I will just say there are some names that I don't recognize in the attendees. So Karen, if any of those people are you, you can raise your hand and I'll move you over to the panelists. Otherwise, I'll just assume you haven't arrived quite yet. There's Karen. Okay, so Mr. Marshall, you are the co-host. We have six 33 Amherst media is here. We are recording. You have a quorum. You're good to go. Okay, thank you. Welcome to the Amherst planning board meeting of September 7, 2022. My name is Doug Marshall and as the chair of the Amherst planning board, I am calling this meeting to order at 634pm. This meeting is being recorded and is available live stream via Amherst media. The minutes are being taken. Pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended by chapter 22 of the acts of 2022 and extended again by the state legislature on July 16 2022. This planning board meeting, including public hearings will be conducted via remote means using the zoom platform. The link is available on the meeting agenda posted on the town websites calendar listing for this meeting, or go to the planning board web page and click on the most recent agenda, which lists the zoom link at the top of the page. No in-person attendance of the public is permitted. However, every effort will be made to ensure the public can adequately access the meeting in real time via technological means. In the event we are unable to do so for reasons of economic hardship or despite best efforts, we will post an audio or video recording transcript or other comprehensive record of proceedings, as soon as possible after the meeting on the town of Amherst website. Board members I will take a roll call. When I call your name, unmute yourself answer affirmatively and return to mute. Bruce cold. I'm here. I'm sorry. I was losing my place. All right. Trying to open many screens. All right. Thank you, Bruce. Tom Long. Present. Andrew McDougal. Present. I Doug Marshall and presence. Janet McGowan. Here. Yohana Newman. Present. And Karen winter. Present. Thank you all. Please. Sir members, if technical issues arise, we may need to pause temporarily to fix the problem and then continue the meeting. If the discussion needs to pause, it will be noted in the minutes. Please use the raise hand function to ask a question or make a comment. I will see your request and call on you to speak after speaking. Remember to remute yourself. regarding items that are not on tonight's agenda. Please be aware the board will not respond to public comment during the general public comment period. Public comment may also be heard at other times during the meeting when determined appropriate. Please indicate you wish to make a comment by clicking the raise hand button when public comment is listed. If you have joined the Zoom meeting using a telephone, please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing star nine on your phone. When called on, please identify yourself by stating your full name and address and put yourself back into mute when finished speaking. Residents can express their views for up to three minutes or at the discretion of the planning board chair. If a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds their allotted time, their participation will be disconnected from the meeting. All right. So that's the end of the introduction. We'll move on to the first item on the agenda for this evening. And that is minutes. And I believe we have the minutes from August 17th, our last meeting available for review and approval by the board. Board members, I believe this was in your packet. Uh, Johanna, I see your hand. I vote or I move to approve the minutes from August 17th. As drafted. Okay. There was one extra space, but it doesn't matter. Okay. Bruce, I see your hand. Yes, I would, I would second that, but I also raised my hand, asked whether you would be prepared to read the attendees list as we did last week as well. I was expecting to do that. And I was going to wait a couple more minutes, maybe after we do the minutes. So this is just my second of the Johanna's motion. Okay. Thank you. All right. Board members, we have a motion on the floor and a second. Are there any comments that you would like to make on the minutes as drafted? All right. I'm not seeing any new hands. Let's see. All right. And why don't we go ahead and have a vote on the minutes? I'll do another roll call here. All right. Bruce, how do you vote? Oops. Hi. Hi. Okay. Tom. Hi. Andrew. I'm staying. Hi. Janet. Hi. Johanna. Hi. And Karen. Hi. And I'm an I as well. So the motion passes six in favor, one abstention. Thank you all. So the time now is 6.39. And I will read the list of names that I can see in the participant box not here on the Zoom platform. We have Bruce Allen. We have Doug Sarrell. We have Mara Keane. Nina Thice. T-H-E-I-S. Pat Pattenode. And someone named Rory. So that's the who has shown up as an attendee at this time in the meeting. About 10 minutes in. All right. We'll now move on to item two in the agenda, which is our public comment period. So as I stated earlier, this is for comments on topics which we are not going to deal with as part of our published agenda this evening. So if you have comments about any of those topics, please hold them until we get to those topics later this evening. So participants, public attendees, are there any of you that would like to make a public comment at this time? Okay. I'm not seeing any raised hands. And we'll conclude that there is no public comment this evening. All right. The time is 6.41 now. And we will move on to item three. We have two zoning bylaw public hearings this evening. I think they're both continued. So first one, in accordance with the provisions of mass general law chapter 40a, this joint public hearing has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted and is being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be heard regarding the zoning bylaw article two zoning districts and article three use regulations and article 16 FEMA floodplain overlay district. This hearing is continued from June 1st, 2022 to see if the town will vote to add article 16 FEMA floodplain overlay district to the zoning bylaw and amend article two zoning districts to add the FEMA floodplain overlay district and amend related sections of article three use regulations to regulate activities in the 100 year floodplain as shown on the flood insurance rate maps issued by the federal emergency management agent agency for the administration of the national flood insurance program. The flood insurance rate maps indicate areas that have a 1% chance of flooding in a given year. The purpose of the floodplain management regulations is to protect the public health safety and welfare and to minimize the harmful impacts of flooding upon the community. Okay. And then the second of the public hearings is the zoning bylaw official zoning map. The FEMA floodplain overlay district also continued from June 1st, 2022 to see if the town will vote to amend the official zoning map to add the FEMA floodplain overlay district for the purpose of regulating activities as described in article 16 FEMA floodplain overlay district. First of all, board members, are there any board disclosures you would like to make on this regarding this proposal? Okay. I don't see any hands raised there. So at this time, Chris, I know you wanted to give an introduction and bring our new members of the board up to speed and maybe introduce the topic for new members of the public. Thank you. Yes. Hello. I'm Chris Brestrup, planning director, and I'd like to remind the planning board members of a few things about our flood mapping project and introduce new planning board members and others to the project. I have with me Senior Planner Nate Malloy. AECOM is our engineering consultants on this project, but they are not able to join us this evening. So we've been working on this project for a long time, but most recently in 2022, the town council members heard a brief introduction to the project in February. And then again in April, town council referred the zoning portion of this project, article 16 and articles two and three, to the planning board for review, along with associated changes to the official zoning map. They also referred them to the CRC, the community resources committee. And on May 2, the town council also referred the firm maps or flood insurance rate maps and the flood insurance study to the CRC for a recommendation. On March 16, 2022, the planning staff gave an introduction to the planning board members and then opened a public hearing on this project on June 1st of 2022. This is a little bit of a complicated project. There are two different but associated items for the planning board and the CRC and town council to consider and adopt. And one is the items associated with the zoning amendment. So that is the text and maps and the map changes. And the other is the FEMA portion of this, which is the flood insurance rate maps, which are separate from the zoning map and the flood insurance study. So there are actually four things altogether. The town of Amherst is a participant in the national flood insurance program, which is administered by FEMA. And this program provides flood insurance for property owners whose properties are subject to flooding. If the municipality in which the property is located participates in the national flood insurance program. The town has been working on this project of updating the flood insurance rate maps and the flood insurance study since around 2012. So we're into the 10th year and we're hoping to wind it up this year. The purpose of the project is to create accurate federally approved maps for land affected by flooding in order to provide information to banks, landowners, the conservation commission, the planning board, and other interested parties. Amherst flood maps were last updated in 1983 and new and better technology for mapping flood areas is now available. And town meeting, when we had town meeting appropriated funds during several town meeting cycles to update the Amherst flood maps. Our consulting firm AECOM was hired by the town and has been working with town staff and FEMA to create these more accurate maps. In September of 2017, we had a set of preliminary flood insurance rate maps that were presented to members of the planning board, the conservation commission, and the public. And at that time we became aware of a new method of analyzing flood data and determining flood boundaries. So town meeting decided to appropriate additional money to do additional studies to bring us up to speed with this new method. The mapping using the new method has now been completed and we've gone through three appeal periods. Only the first, there was only one appeal among those three appeal periods. So most of the preliminary maps have been available online since July of 2020. And recently we've revised some panels that have been online for reviews since July of 2021. The maps have been presented at public meetings, including town council and the planning board. And at one of these meetings it was held on June 25th, 2019. And at that time we sent notifications to all who owned property in the flood plain as depicted on the new maps. The old 1983 maps were based on USGS topography with 10-foot contour integrals. They were also based on data gathered up until the early 1970s. And the new maps are based on town of Amherst GIS Topo, which has one-foot contours, so the contours are much more accurate. The maps are also based on recently, more recently, gathered data. And that means the new maps are much more accurate in terms of showing the where flooding occurs. So what does the town need to do? The town needs to adopt the firm maps, the flood insurance rate maps, and the flood insurance study produced by AECOM and FEMA. And the town needs to adopt the zoning amendment and the changes to the official zoning map. Staff with the assistance of our state flood hazard coordinator, Joy Dupereau at DCR, let's see, Department of Conservation and Recreation, I think that's right, has developed an amendment to the zoning bylaw Article 16, which is we're calling the FEMA Flood Plane Overlay District. We also have some additional amendments to Article 2 and Article 3 in order to establish this district. And we've developed a draft of an amendment to the official zoning map, which Nate will show you later. The zoning amendment and changes to the zoning map that have been proposed because for municipalities that are part of the flood insurance rate program, they need to show that they can and do manage and control development in flood prone areas. So last time we met, we hadn't received our letter of final determination from FEMA, but that letter has finally arrived. It was sent out on August 9th. And we expect that the final set of firm maps with new dates on them will be sent out later this week. The public hearing that was held in June was continued to tonight in expectation that we would have both the letter of final determination and the new final set of maps. We have one, but not the other. And therefore we're recommending that you hold a discussion tonight about the material that you do have and then continue the public hearing on the zoning amendment and the changes to the official zoning map to a date certain in the future. And those dates could be either September 28th or October 19th. So what will happen if we don't adopt the flood maps? If the town fails to adopt the new flood maps, the town of Amherst will no longer be able to participate in the flood insurance program. And people in Amherst will not be able to purchase flood insurance through the flood insurance program. In your packets for June 1st, 2022, you received copies of presentations that have been given by AECOM and Nate Malloy to the town council in February. These are still available by going to the town website and looking on the planning board web page for the packet for June 1st. Members of the planning board who are new may wish to review these presentations. We've also provided you with the minutes of the June 1st, 2022 planning board meeting which describes the discussion that the planning board held that night. We recommend that you use the time this evening to review the text of the proposed article 16 as well as articles two and three which will be presented by Nate Malloy later in the meeting and review the outline of the flood plain overlay district which Nate will also present. The map can be viewed as an interactive map that is posted online so if people want to study it later on they can do that. It's on the planning department web page under planning projects and then there's a whole section on this flood mapping project. So we recommend that you continue, that you hear questions and concerns from the public and ask questions and concerns yourselves and then continue the public hearing and we can talk about the exact date in a little while. After the June 1st meeting Janet McGowan actually I don't know if she submitted her comments after or before June 1st but in any event Nate and I have met with Janet to discuss her comments and concerns about the earlier draft of the zoning amendment and we believe that we've resolved the issues that were brought up by Janet as well as that were brought up by other planning board members and we've revised the text of the zoning amendment based on those comments. So there's one more issue that I'd like to mention and that some of you may have heard about. We've heard that some residents and a few counselors have concerns about the Tanbrook area in the center of town and they're concerned that there's no flood plain shown along the Tanbrook and one panel in the center of town is blank and is not included in the flood plain mapping so I'd like to talk about that. FEMA has a threshold for mapping that requires an area of one square mile of watershed in order to be mapped. The Tanbrook does not have an area of one square mile of watershed. The Conservation Commission has recently had a discussion about Tanbrook and they in the DEP have been working on an issue of whether Tanbrook watershed exceeds one half square mile of watershed and that relates to its potential designation as a perennial stream. I'm not really sure what the outcome of that discussion is but I think that they have resolved the issue but in any event that issue is different from the issue of whether an area qualifies to be mapped as a FEMA or Firm flood plain. Aside from the fact that the Tanbrook doesn't qualify based on its size to be mapped there are some other things I wanted to share with you about having a flood plain designation on one's property. The first thing is that anyone who owns property in a municipality that participates in the Firm flood insurance program may purchase flood insurance. The property does not need to be mapped as a flood plain. The second thing is that flood insurance only covers the building and its contents and not the property on which the building sits. So some people in the Tanbrook area notice flooding in their yards but damage to their yards would not be covered by flood insurance. And the third thing is that most property owners would be more likely to request that their properties be taken out of the flood zone rather than being added to the flood zone and that's for several reasons. One is that the value of their property may decrease as a result of being added to the flood zone. The second thing is that properties that are in the flood zone may be required to purchase flood insurance in order to obtain a mortgage or a home equity loan. And the third thing is that properties that are in the flood zone would be subject to more scrutiny when making changes to the property and they may need to apply to the conservation commission for permission to do things since a hundred-year flood plain is considered a wetland resource area under the Wetlands Protection Act. The conservation commission actually has other ways of figuring out whether a property is in a flood plain but in any event that's that's a third issue. So in terms of the vote that's needed the town council needs to adopt the zoning amendment and the official zoning map by a two-thirds vote and generally speaking we recommend that when the planning board makes a recommendation to town council about zoning amendments we recommend that you also try to achieve a two-thirds vote. The adoption of the firm maps isn't really something that the planning board needs to make a recommendation on but you are welcome to do so if you wish to and those flood insurance rate maps and the flood insurance study also require a majority of the town council rather than a two-thirds vote to adopt them. So we'd be happy to answer any questions that you have and listen to your discussion and be back to you with answers to questions if you have any. So I wonder if you would now, oh okay. Bruce did you have a question? No I did. Oh I'm sorry Doug, Doug has a question. Yeah am I correct that the two new board members are not eligible to vote on this because they were not members that when we initiated the public hearing? I believe that's the case but they can participate in the discussion. Okay thank you. So you were about to turn it over to Nate. I was about to turn it over to Nate with your permission. Yep. Certainly go ahead Nate. Sure thanks Chris and everyone I'm Nate Malloy a planner with the town so as Chris mentioned this has been an ongoing project for a number of years. So essentially we had consultants map the new flood plain area and that's going to become an overlay district in the zoning map so the state needs to know that we regulate the flood plain and the way we're doing that is with an overlay district and then you know article 16 that has all the regulations that meet FEMA and state standards. So you know what we see in article 16 doesn't apply anywhere else but this overlay district and I'll share a map first and then we can go into the text of the language. It's interesting. Sorry I had a zoom update today and it looks like I have to allow zoom to a lot of it shoot. Let me see if I can do this. I guess it's a security issue. So anyways let's see if this works. Did you want to share the map? I could forward it to Doug. Yeah let me see if I can try it now. I just had to change something out. Here we are. Yeah sorry about that. I had a long overdue zoom update. I never like to do them but it forced me to when I opened it today. So anyways the you know the current so in this map I'll zoom in in a minute the current maps are from 1983 and there's probably about 500 properties and over 400 structures that are in the flood plain and then in the new flood plain there's still you know like 450 properties but there's fewer than 70 structures and so you know the amount of properties hasn't changed significantly but the number of structures has and so what we have here is a comparison map that shows I'll zoom into this section for instance in the orange is the 83 map and then in the blue is the current map and then this data for the current map the preliminary flood zone it was based on information from February of 2022 so you know it's more than likely the most current information once FEMA updates all their information like Chris said and sends it out we can change this but you know so what it's done is it's become a lot more refined so you know for instance in this area we'll just zoom in here you can see where the flood zone is actually following the stream and topography along the bank and then going up you know a little bit along the tributary so and in 1983 you know you can see the stream if you follow my cursor you know winds here the flood zone was a little less accurate and so you know you know throughout town there's that's the kind of difference that's occurring you know it does make a difference for instance here's Pomory village intersection you know if you know we would like to develop the village intersection you know this area this this village along the intersection so in this area for instance in 83 the map just made a broad sweeping you know cotton area that was really outside the flood plain so now we can see that really it's going to you know this property is above the stream and so all this area in orange is no longer part of the would be part of the FEMA overlay district right now this map has both layers set up 83 and the current and so it is a swipe map so if you want you can turn it on and you can go back and forth to see what you know if you go to first you know if you go to this one you can turn whatever swipe layer on if you want the 83 or the flood zone so here it is town wide again you can zoom into another section in town and you can go left right so you can hear here is with both of them on and here is just the current one so you can see what the changes are so again this is you know Pelham Road right here you know most of this is conserved farmland but again just the accuracy of the new maps you can see the outline you know undulates and follows topography a lot more you know we can zoom out and go to other parts of town with this you know swipe on so you know North Amherst is another area it's mostly along the Mill River and Fort River that has flood zones so here again you can see you know the North Amherst Village Center there is significant difference in terms of what you know the yellow and what you know what's map based on the 83 map and what really it will be with the newer maps and so the area in blue is what will become the FEMA overlay district and so that's based on the firm maps and so you know that will become a zoning overlay district so you know just the things in blue are there any questions about the map or yes Doug yeah I wondered whether the definition of a 100 year storm has changed given the way the intensity and frequency of rain has changed in the last 25 years right I have no idea what you're talking about Doug but yeah so when we asked FEMA our consultants this you know we said well what you know does it account for you know global climate change or like you said different storm events and so what they said is you know the previous or the current maps from 83 really the data stopped being collected in the mid 70s and so now they've had you know storm events and we're region one so includes New England and New York state maybe some of Pennsylvania and so it really focuses on our region so 40 years of data real-time data there's also been in-stream gauges that measure stream flow you know velocity quantity and so when Chris mentioned that a few years ago there was a new methodology you know new kind of equation that was used FEMA doesn't update their equations very often and so this is like you know once every 30 year opportunity and so their new equation that we started using takes into account this new data so you know they won't say it's adjusting for climate change what they'll say is it's based on you know more current events and they've changed their variables to factor in those things and so you know so our understanding is yes you know the definition of a 100 year flood necessarily you know the elevations in certain things you know can be adjusted and the formula has been adjusted but you know the say definition of it is still the same just perhaps where the boundaries are shown is different right but you know the 1% chance is still the 1% chance but perhaps it's now covering a bigger area because the amount of rainfall or the storm events have changed so you know the the floodplain is still the same definition as it was 40 years ago it's just now the the geographic area that it covers may have changed because of this new formula okay thank you and so I'll do a new share so as Chris mentioned the there's this overlay district and then there's three parts of the bylaw that are changing it's article two article three and then a new article 16 and sorry Johanna I see you had your hand raised I don't know if you yeah go ahead Johanna thanks can Nate can you just talk a little bit more about what the like what are the implications of the overlay district and what are their things that you either like what does it mean for the average person who might own land that would be affected by the changes in the map yeah so I think you know Chris kind of mentioned it really the the impact is it's probably you know two big ones one is permitting you know through conservation commission one is financial whether it's insurance or other things so you know if your property is in you know has some portion the FEMA floodplain a bank may require you to purchase flood insurance you know if you have a mortgage or you're taking out a home equity line or other instances and right now our maps are somewhat inaccurate and so a homeowner might say well my home is really higher than the floodplain even if the property you know it doesn't show on the map and the bank might say well the maps are so old we're still going to require you to get flood insurance but now with a more accurate map a homeowner could you know say well look it only covers a portion of my property not the structures and so they you know may not have to get to be required to get flood insurance so just having that accuracy of new maps is really important for for a homeowner in terms of the financial impact you know if you are you know some banks it's different I think lenders may be different but you know so anyways to have a really accurate maps does reflect you know how um you know whether or not you have to get insurance FEMA also has a new way they calculate insurance rates and so you know Amherst I don't know if it's a high flood risk but you know based on the new mapping FEMA will do a more accurate job of calculating your flood risk and therefore your flood insurance rates so your you know your rates are going to be more accurate than um somewhere that is older maps I see Chris as a hand raised I'll just finish the other one is permitting so the conservation commission needs to review any project in the flood plain and so you know having accurate boundaries you know could save someone from potentially applying for a permit that isn't necessary right now say if you're in the 83 map and now it's different so you know I think those are the big ones um you know Chris also mentioned you can voluntarily purchase flood insurance if you're not in the FEMA flood zone just if you want to be safe say you're nearby and you might have a reduced rate because you're actually not mapped as part of being that zone so just having those maps you know can allow a property owner to make a decision about what they want to do in terms of insurance requirements okay thanks may and then I don't know if we want to okay so I see Janet's hand um thank you thank you um I was just getting back to Doug's question I'm not sure I caught this are you saying that the FEMA's calculation of flood risk is accounting for increased rain or climate change yeah so you know the the definition of the one percent flood or the flood plain you know is the same definition but they've used more information more accurate data to determine you know say how um how big of an area that is right so you know they came out and surveyed Amherst and so they've said well if this is the volume that is a one percent you know they've mapped it in a way to more accurately reflect you know the recent storms so you know they've had in-stream gauges and they've had 40 years of data you know it also takes into account like impervious area and other things sometimes in a region so it's become a more accurate reflection of you know current conditions I mean they won't they you know they FEMA our consultant hasn't said directly that it addresses climate change I don't think they look at it that way they don't try to project they use you know they only use you know collected data so they're not going to make for these one percent maps they're not going to try to make put in a variable some projection in their formula you know they're not going to say oh let's just assume a 20 percent increase in the next you know 30 years and somehow draw maps based on that they're going to draw the regulatory maps based on collected data and so you know but that has been you know like I said I you know I was told that you know they do have in-stream gauges in the region that they've been using to help you know calculate that so all right um I saw a couple of hands for a while and they've gone away so maybe you should hear why don't we go you want to go through this language in article two or yeah so you know there's the the three sections of the zoning bylaw article two article three and then article 16 so article two is um the the section where we define zoning districts and so really we're adding the FEMA floodplain overlay district and so you know this whole this language will be you know would be new so we're actually saying what it is you know it's an overlay district intended to provide protection of and regulation of activities in the special flood hazard areas designated on the town of Amherst flood insurance rate maps issued by um you know FEMA um for the flood insurance program exact boundaries of which are defined by the one percent chance base flood elevation elevations shown on the firm and further defined by the flood insurance study and shown on the official zoning map for the town of Amherst and so that's the why have you used 2001 2011 as the date of the map and why won't the map date be 2022 well it says as amended so in 2011 the town actually went to the electronic zoning map as the official zoning map so we no longer have a paper zoning map as the official map it's actually the online GIS is our official zoning map and so you know we say as amended so that captures it so really the official zoning map you know it was adopted on 2011 it's just been updated since okay all right um and so that hasn't changed you know since you can see the date may 20 so that you know that hasn't changed if there's any comments um but that's you know that defines the district uh Andrew yeah mine was just a really quick one on word choice would it be in the first line to provide protection of or protection for so it's district intended to provide protection I would think of that as for I'm not a grammarian but you know all right I'm not yeah I mean people disagree that's fine I just that's it reads odd to me like that well I can say it doesn't read oddly to me but I could see either one probably working so Nate maybe you can just think about that consult consult the town grammarian whoever that is in town hall yeah I'm not yeah I don't know Chris and I we can talk about it and then I'll share article three is the next one um and so article three is uh use regulations and so uh within the bylaw there's a few areas where we where we discuss um you know floodways or flood plains and so you know we have 3.13 actually has development in floodways and it's it's own little you know one little paragraph um and so what we've added at the end is C article 16 female floodplain overlay district and so you know this you know instead of trying to change this because you know it could have ripple effects um you know we have a reference article 16 so um you know that's just calling attention to it and then the flood prone conservancy district the FBC district that's a base zoning district and that's not changing at this time and so you know there's still the whole section of you know 3.22 that has um you know development standards and requirements in the FBC and that's not changing so our FBC district right maybe and it is and is this is stricter than FEMA so we don't allow certain development in our FBC even though FEMA might allow it in a floodplain so we're adding this language right here uh the floodplain management regulations found in article 16 FEMA floodplain overlay district shall take precedence over any less restrictive conflicting provision of this bylaw or other local bylaw regulation or code and so um you know it's just a way to again without trying to change the FBC district to align with um with the FEMA it's is it actually be really difficult um we have this this you know this one one statement here okay I don't see any comments from the board I will say that we've shared this with Joy Chris mentioned the contact at the state so the process would be you know we want the town to adopt the zoning um the maps everything at least you know four to six weeks before the due date so you know um we have until February of 2023 but the idea would be a town would adopt the zoning four to six weeks before because then we have to send our local bylaw and map and regulations to the state then the state does their final review and also sends it to FEMA and so you know this has already been reviewed by the state preliminarily but after we the town approves that we'd have to send it off to the state again uh and then for their final approval and then FEMA's approval um so you know we've been doing that so I feel like we're in good shape but you know we we still we can't wait um you know to the very end all right and then here's article the new article 16 uh as of September 2nd so Chris mentioned that this incorporates um you know comments from Janet um and other you know some other public comments since we last presented it the um you know so what the state wants to see is that we regulate uh development in the flood plain and you know we thought the easiest way to go about this was to create this you know this own article in relationship to the overlay district as opposed to trying to have a piecemeal approach so you know we could say that there were some the state looked at it and said you know your FBC does a little bit your wetlands regulations does a little bit but it doesn't it doesn't all capture it very well and so instead of trying to have you know 20 different sections in our bylaw we created this you know concise section um that meets both the state standards and FEMA standards so it has um you know in intent and purpose um you know those have and change you know so whatever is shown in track changes here is what's changed since since June uh so you know we um updated the prevent the occurrence of public emergencies contamination pollution from flooding um we also added another purpose to allow the flood plain to operate naturally and drain flood flood waters without excessive development that can add to flooding so you know here's the intent and purpose um the definitions which I just want to stress the definitions only apply within the FEMA flood plain overlay district so you know we define historic structures in in this section right we define development but that only applies within the overlay within that mapped area that I showed so it doesn't apply to other parts of the bylaw um so you know someone couldn't point to this and say well you know I have a historic structure because of this definition in this section it really only applies uh within that FEMA overlay um so you know these haven't changed much we deleted a flood hazard boundary map because we don't have that in Amherst we actually will have approved firm maps um you know the state had said Janet you know some people have asked what these references are right here base code chapter 2 section 202 and there's reference here um you know the state said we can delete all those references so it's either to you know state building code um you know code of figure you know code of federal regulations or FEMA standard so we don't it's actually not required to be in the bylaw so um we've left them in but we could delete them I guess um if people find that confusing um you know so this hasn't changed much we did uh clarify startup construction that um is the date of issues of a building permit for new construction and or substantial improvements to existing structures the actual start of construction must commence within 100 days 180 days of issuance of the building permit so before it was kind of a run-on sentence and then we you know put this on a second paragraph the actual start of construction means the first placement of permanent construction of a building on a site and then the it goes on to define it so again this is only relevant to what's happening in the FEMA floodplain over overlay district it's not you know this definition wouldn't apply to other parts of the bylaw and then substantial repair of the foundation you know we separated it out a bit to A and B um as I mentioned there aren't too many structures within the floodplain anymore you know there's about 70 as opposed to a few hundred um one thing that we've done section 16.2 designation of a floodplain administrator we've designated the planning director to be the floodplain administrator FEMA does require this now that there is a person who coordinates you know it doesn't have to be the person who actually goes through the permitting with an applicant but really has to just make sure that we're following all the regulations so the floodplain administrator is really a coordinator you know they'll just make sure that projects are getting the permitting they need um and then if there's any map changes or appeals about FEMA's maps they're involved with that with the community we list the duties of the floodplain administrator and the bylaw doesn't need to do this and so many communities don't list the duties just because you know if they change and it's in the bylaw then you have to change the bylaw so we said may include um and we've deleted a few and we've just clarified some so working with appropriate local staff to coordinate compliance issues and enforcement actions um so you know we do think it's important just to lay this out what the coordinator will be doing it also helps applicants and other town boards and committees but you know it's not a requirement of the bylaw necessarily or or FEMA the state likes that we have it in here though just it's it's thorough um let's see if we keep going down there's regulations so the big piece is 16.3 you know we have a number of regulations within the floodplain overlay district and so uh 16.31 um FEMA wants to know that we somehow review or permit all activities in a floodplain and so we've deleted a bunch from this section you can see here in the sidebar and so originally we said something about like having a checklist and you'd go through and it was somewhat confusing because there's so many different types of permits and so really um this first paragraph is language um you know this this right here is kind of required that the state asks that we say something that we we review work for all for everything that's highlighted here so we say that the town of Amherst requires a permit for all proposed construction or other development in the FEMA FEMA floodplain overlay district including and then it kind of defines what that is new construction or changes to existing buildings placement of manufactured homes placement of agricultural facilities placement of fill fences sheds storage facilities are drilling mining paving in any other development that might increase flooding or adversely impact flood risk to other properties um what we do go on to say though without saying you know that we have a checklist is that the town's permit review process includes the requirement that the proponent obtain all local state federal and federal permits necessary in order to carry out the proposed development in the FEMA floodplain overlay district in addition to any building permit or other local federal local state or federal permits needed any development in the FEMA floodplain overlay district shall require review by the wetlands administrator to determine if review by the review and approval by the conservation commission is required and so the floodplain overlay is a regulated area by mass DEP so the conservation commission will typically review any work in the floodplain there are a few instances when it wouldn't need a permit by the conservation commission in that instance the flood the wetlands administrator will actually kind of administratively approve it and the way it works right now uh when even a building permit comes in or even electrical permit for interior work comes in and the property is in the floodplain overlay district the wetlands administrator has to check off on that has to approve it so they have to they review any permit that comes in so they'll say oh it's just you know you're changing on light bulbs or new fixtures on the interior rebuilding it really doesn't need a permit so we already have this step in place um and we're just you know we're saying it now in the bylaw and so that's what FEMA wants to know that we'll you know we'll make sure that you know development has the right permitting uh requirements um if I could just jump in the reason we put that sentence in about the wetlands administrator it was sort of a tip out tip off to the applicant that they should go that route even if it's it's not intuitive I think that if you were changing your lighting inside a building you have to go to the wetlands administrator so that sentence is really for anyone reading the bylaw to think oh I have to do that so right yeah I'm not sure people even know that that happens uh internally that you know they at this that the wetlands administrator looks at all those permits um you know the rest of this these regulations are so the state you know there's in the letter of final determination that was sent it mentioned that we had to comply with a cfr a code of federal regulation and the state created a model bylaw that adapted the federal regulations into local um into say a bylaw format and that's what these next sections are so you know 16.32 floodway encroachment um 0.33 all these um sections are really adapted from the federal regulations that the state has you know wants us to include in our bylaw so they really haven't changed much we um we did say review by town staff or subdivision approval that all subdivision proposals and development proposals and the FEMA flood plan overlay district shall be reviewed by town staff to assure that you know they meet these standards base flood elevation it's really interesting for subdivision proposals when proposing subdivisions or other developments greater than 50 lots and or five acres the proponent must provide technical data on the flood elevation so we clarified that before it said something like five lots or five acres whichever is less and so um we just you know try to clarify that language same with recreational vehicles we just added FEMA's flood zone regulation so you know FEMA does allow recreational vehicles like an RV or a camper to be stored in a flood plain and so the town you know would as well if it's you know temporarily there um watercourse alterations again proposed you know we're saying that they would have to any river in a river situation the flood plan administrator shall notify the following of any proposed or actual alterations or relocations of a watercourse so you know if in the odd chance someone proposes to change the mill river then we would you know have to go through this notification process um so they do allow 16.38 and 16.39 you can get variances and we just I know clarified this a little bit and just you know I mean really just clarified it a little bit that the flood plan administrator would sign the letter for a variance and so and then we changed the enforcement piece to the building commissioner the state said the flood plan administrator may it may be inconsistent that they are the enforcement mechanism the building commissioner really actually has that ability as a zoning enforcement officer so we made that change and so again the enforcement piece we have an enforcement section in our zoning bylaw which could work for the FEMA overlay district but we've included our own enforcement section here you know so it's it's somewhat redundant but it's really just specific to the FEMA overlay district if we didn't have this any enforcement would default to the other enforcement section in the bylaw and so uh that's that's it hey Nate I had two sort of minor comments or back early in the in the document under 16.06 16.06 yes yeah I wondered why you wanted to use the word excessive and why that couldn't be struck I mean you you want to allow some development that would that would you know cause the flood plane to operate unnaturally and you know add to flooding but you'll but you only want to prohibit excessive flooding you know excessive development yeah we could um we can I mean it just seemed unnecessary and kind of calling into question you know it creates an opportunity to argue about how much development is okay right and then then the second thing was on the next page where you reference the the base code and that's in the third paragraph there yeah um whose whose base code is that is there an agency or an entity that you could reference that would just make it clear where that's coming from yeah when I asked the state uh joy she just she I asked her um I copied this and we have the you know us we have the um us code of federal regulation so for the base code chapter two section 202 I think she said that that was uh she in an email she said it was either the state building code or some state regulation but she joy kind of indicated it would it might be better just to delete all these um all these references just but um right we could we could say like you know state regulation or whatever you know if this was a CMR yeah well I mean I I kind of like having them just it kind of makes it gives it more authority but but you know it's it's it's always just frustrating to not know what you're referring to so no yeah I agree yet just just a comment all right uh Chris I see your hand so I was just going to say I think it would be pretty easy to get the actual references from joy and maybe we should just go ahead and do that yeah no christen didn't email she did provide that but she only she did it in a bolded list and didn't you know cross-reference it to certain things but she said what the sources were so I guess I'm going to ask one one other question I do see janet hand um so if I have a property and I'm in a flood plain it's potential that I'm that I'm in the flood prone zoning district that that I'm subject to the town's requirements for flood prone properties that's that's not just the zoning district and I'm and I'm subject to section 16 right so I could have three parts of the zoning code that apply to my property that I need to look at all three and is that going to feel like a burden that's why we have staff to help a property owner so yeah so you know for Doug's point um you know this is North Amherst you know the FPC zoning district you know is much bigger right it comes in you know covers areas out here that are not part of the FEMA overlay right so this property owner if they if they wanted to say oh I could could I develop here well if it's in the FPC that's right that is his own standards then it has you know the revised flood map and so now it has the FEMA overlay district and then there's you know possibly you know conservation commissioner of you and others so yeah I I mean um you know that's just what it is I don't know it's okay all right janet um I I found the references to state and federal law confusing because it just seemed to just sort of stick there and I didn't know what the base code was I've never heard that used in state law but I also wondered what would happen if the code of federal leg regulations or the US code section number changed or the base code changed like what does it mean to stick in this you know 2022 references and five years later it's really in a different place so I kind of I'm sort of at first I was like ah who cares and now I'm kind of thinking maybe confusing or inflexible like you don't want to have to come back to town counseling we want to make the reference to the US code different so like what does it do like does it help people and I think you're right um that just happened with our block grant um contracts the state or the the federal government updated the their their codes for block grant pieces so just the the references changed to like section three and a few things and so um we just had a contract be reviewed by DHCD and they said oh these references need to change I mean it's just like right it's like 24 CFR 500 point whatever right these little references so out of 150 page document they said oh your a few references are wrong and I said well what's wrong is it the reference or is it the language they said no it's just the reference just that reference changed the section number changed so we had to go and change our contracts because these three references changed and so to your point I do think that if the federal code changed and that reference was wrong it was no longer whatever 45 you know 44 section whatever then our bylaw would have to be updated to correct for that so you know it well I guess that's an argument to take them out yeah does it serve enough of a purpose to keep it like who who does it help to leave it in yeah I mean I guess would it be I mean if we deleted it um I mean would we ever have you know we have like the beginning paragraph that says the definitions shall apply all within the FEMA or LA district would we say something that the definitions are derived from you know state building code federal regulation and you know just make a reference to those few few sections those codes without you know being too specific that might help that might be good you kind of serving the purpose but not you know freezing yourself in time are there any other comments from board members right um why don't we see if there are any attendees in the public who want to make any comments are there any members of the public that would like to comment on these proposed changes to the zoning code of the zoning bylaw I am not seeing any hands raised from the public okay so thanks Nate um Chris you're suggesting that we continue this yes I'm suggesting that you continue it and then there's a discussion about the fact that you only have one scheduled meeting in October and the reason for that is there's a um Yom Kapoor is on October 4th and 5th and so you wouldn't have a meeting on October 5th you could much to Pam's just may have a meeting on September 28th just to tackle this issue or you could have a meeting on October 19th about this issue so one of those two dates would be appropriate um well I can say personally I will not be able to attend September 28th meeting I you know October 19th I think was the other date and that that's feasible it would be important to have um five members I believe well I would like to have five five members that can vote so president voting yeah so it's all the so it makes it sound like I'm critical for that meeting but will we have the firm maps by then well they've told us that the firm maps will be sent out this week now we've heard from them in the past about promises and haven't been achieved but I would like to put my faith in them and think that the maps will be sent out this week but to your point Doug I mean if you waited it would at least I would assume by the October meeting we'd have all the right yeah and people would have had a chance to look at them and review them yeah we have a meeting on the 21st too right you do yeah is that agenda full that is well it's got the archipelago 47 olympia drive on it so um so that's going to be a good long conversation I guess the question that I have is whether these firm maps are going to be controversial or whether we're going to have a long conversation about them or whether it's something we could sort of you know see see them say they look great and make take our vote and move on to the archipelago project well you could do that I don't know I mean so here's the other thing um you're under some sort of timeline too so if the October meeting is a problem from that point of view that might influence what we do this month I don't think October is a problem I think um so the CRC is meeting tomorrow and they're going to be reviewing essentially the same things that you just reviewed tonight and then they were proposing to continue their public hearing until October 27th so that would mean that both meetings would be in October and then we'd get that over with and then the town council could review this in November I'm hoping Bruce two meetings town council does yep Bruce you're muted what what would you like to say um I was just thinking um that would it be possible to schedule it for the 21st for the first meeting without the archipelago and to instead of taking it first take a second and if the archipelago went too long the the simple act of the 21st could be to continue it to the following week and there would be enough time to advertise that meeting and make so long as you knew that you're the five of you who must vote would be available for that date and so you might be able to get it done on the 21st but otherwise there's a fallback the only thing I would change is we would not on the 21st we would need to continue it to the October date right uh because I would not be available on the 28th of September no I hope sorry I might have got the October meeting dates wrong but uh okay so the but the question was I think the archipelago meeting was before the October option could could the new members just view the hearing we had previously I can't remember who was in June or would that cure our numbers problem Chris you're muted so that would be a question for KP law but last time we dealt with this issue was when Doug had newly joined the planning board and he missed the first public hearing session because he wasn't yet a member and then the decision came down that he would not be able to vote on the project because he had missed that session and couldn't catch up by watching it since he hadn't been a member at that time but if we wanted to pursue this I could contact KP law and ask them this is different from a public hearing with regard to you know an adjudicatory hearing like a special permit or a site plan review so there could be some difference at that time we were not doing remote meetings you know and it does seem like we're in a slightly different world now so you know I don't know how extensive or how much time it would take with KP to pose that question but it might be helpful to know going forward yeah I'm a little surprised that I'm the last one that this issue was that came up with we've had several other new members since then I will check that out but at this point should we just continue to the 21st yep and you know at at worst I guess we could just perfunctorily continue on to October without even doing anything else yep okay so there you are you disappeared from my screen um sorry what time on the 21st we must have continued archipelago to 635 35 yeah we did you want to give them a an hour nominally and say 7 735 or something yes I'm sure we'll need more than an hour but I'm noticing that you have one other thing which is article 14 we're going to bring that back to you on the 21st but I don't think we had a particular time for that and Jonathan Gerfine too was he planning to come back on the 21st Chris he was but we might be able to push him off until October if people weren't too disturbed by that okay I'm more disturbed by hearing how much we have to talk about that night yeah yeah um so I I think that it sounds like this is not going to be a difficult vote on the zoning amendment and the map for whoever is eligible to vote that's that's my sense I mean we haven't gotten very many comments at all none none particularly negative and none from the public so so why don't we say the flood maps come back at 735 on the 21st okay and I won't give my introductory speech that night okay all right so um let's see we need a motion to continue do we are we continuing both hearings correct yeah so we're continuing the so maybe I'll try to sound out a motion here and I'll just make it so I move that we continue this public hearing for the zoning bylaw for article two article three and article 16 all related to FEMA floodplain overlay district and the hearing for the FEMA floodplain overlay district maps uh all continued to September 21st at 735 p.m. Chris does that sound plausible I'm seeing you nod your head okay good I'm muted sorry yes good so I already have a hand from Johanna I'll second the motion thank you Johanna maybe maybe next time Tom um so any conversation by the board on that motion no all right so in that case why don't we run through the roll uh Bruce uh I can vote yes for that all right uh Tom aye Andrew aye Janet aye Johanna aye Karen aye and I'm an aye as well all right so we'll continue that hearing thank you all right so we'll now move on to item four on our agenda these are special public special permit public hearings uh the first one is with SPP 2022-04 Amherst Office Park LLC at 463 West Street request to reopen the public hearing for this application for the purpose of voting on a request to withdraw without prejudice the original approval of the special permit to extinguish previous special permits ZBA FY84-0085 ZBA FY85 00094 did not have a sufficient number of board members voting map 19d parcel 3 in the bvc zoning district all right so Chris do you want to take these one at a time I assume that would be a good idea yeah okay let me explain anything yeah so we've now reopened to this public hearing yeah Chris why don't why don't you vote to reopen the public hearing all right so board members is there any do I need a motion yes all right I saw I saw I moved to reopen the public hearing okay and I see Johanna's hand again she just beat Tom it's like Jeopardy I second the motion okay thank you all right so board members why don't we vote on that uh Bruce you all right with opening reopening this public hearing yes Tom hi and Andrew hi and Janet hi Johanna hi and Karen hi and I am and I as well that's seven in favor to reopen this public hearing Chris is this going to be a topic that we that we cannot all vote on again I think you cannot all vote on it five of you can vote on it and I think that you should read a truncated version of the preamble which I believe that Pam has prepared all right can you just read the project description well I think well I've got it I've got it here Pam I've got what you wrote at least okay so in accordance with the provisions of mass general law chapter 40a this joint public hearing has been duly advertised and noticed thereof has been posted and is being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be heard regarding SPP 2022-04 Amherst office park LLC 463 S street and I I have already read the text that you've had for that and then there was SPP 2023-03 this is a new public hearing Amherst office park LLC excuse me why don't you hold off on that one and finish the first one and then go back and do the second one all right so I have now read that we have voted to reopen the hearing the hearing is open and Chris why don't you explain what we're doing okay so it's an error on the part of planning staff and I will fess up to this when you held the public hearing on June 15th there were only four planning board members present and you voted to grant a site plan review approval to Amherst office park LLC and at the same time you voted to grant this special permit to allow the extinguishing of previous special permits but it turned out that you didn't have sufficient number of planning board members present to vote on the special permit so I only found that out after the public hearing was closed I realized it I should say and so we're asking you back tonight to reopen the public hearing Mr. Lavertier has submitted a request for to withdraw that that application and I think you had that in your packets it was on his letterhead and so if you would approve his request to withdraw then you could close this public hearing for the first item here and and and at that point we will have a second hearing where we consider the same request yes that's correct and I think you would then open that public hearing and consider that same request and then vote on that okay I think you should vote on this one first all right and I'm going to leave leave it to your good judgment on why we we can't just have more than five votes on the current public hearing oh you could have more than five you could have five votes on the current but I mean could have seven votes like it's the same request in the new request it's newly requested since July 1st and then new planning board members have been members since July 1st so they are they are eligible so that's the reason for closing yes for initiating a new public hearing that's correct is to allow everyone to vote on it yep okay all right and so the people who can vote on closing or on allowing it to be withdrawn are the people who were previously on the board only anyone who was previously on the board even those who weren't there that night okay so is that clear to everyone um so so I think we're gonna we're gonna need a motion to accept the request to withdraw without prejudice right yes okay tom you you got there first don't move okay chris have you heard enough to call to say we have a motion yes I have thank you okay andrew second all right thank you all right so um we're we're gonna have five members who are eligible to vote chris you're saying we need five votes hmm yep I think so all right so uh bruce and karen you can sit back on this one any discussion any discussion from the public okay I'm not seeing any hands anywhere all right so to withdraw without prejudice tom hi andrew hi janet hi johanna hi and i'm and i as well and to close the public hearing all right so you could roll that into the motion if you wanted to that you already made right so tom that's a friendly amendment I moved to close the public hearing all right and I'll I'll go ahead and second that if we want to consider the second motion or not all right um I I assume we could all vote on that chris yeah I um I think why don't you just stick to the five okay be safer keep it clean and uh so that'll be tom hi and andrew hi and janet hi johanna hi and I'm and I as well so we have now closed public hearing SPP 2022-04 and we have allowed the applicant to withdraw without prejudice thank you all right so now on to our next and our new public hearing in accordance with the provisions of mass general law chapter 40a this joint this public hearing has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted and is being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be hard regarding SPP 2023-03 Amherst office park LLC 463 west street new request for special permit to extinguish previous special permits zba fy 84-00085 and zba fy 85-00094 as zoning has changed and mixed use building buildings are currently permitted by site plan review map 19d parcel three in the bvc zoning district is there any board member disclosure I do not see any hands all right chris you are you presenting on behalf of the applicant I'm going to I can present the applicant is not here tonight we did invite him but he uh uh you know right didn't really want to come again so anyway the two special permits that are asked to be extinguished were included in your packets so I presume you've had a chance to read them and they had to do with as we said before a previous zoning situation and now the zoning has changed to bvc and mixed use buildings are currently allowed in bvc by site plan review so there's no longer a need for the special permits if we were to keep them in place then we would have to be worried about the conditions of those special permits and I think I also included the decision for site plan review that was part of this original public hearing which talked about the fact that the conditions of those previous special permits weren't really needed anymore I think that was a specific question that was asked by one of the planning board members so we feel that we can reasonably extinguish these two zba special permits without any um law in that in the proceedings and in enforcement okay all right um board members are there questions about this application all right I'm not seeing any raised hands uh how about members of the public are there any members of the public who want to comment on this application to extinguish the previous special permits not seeing any hands there either um especially new board members Bruce and Karen you're okay with going ahead with the vote I'm seeing heads nodding Bruce I see your hand yes I was just going to say yes in fact as an attendee in the public side of the thing I did actually attend the previous meeting so I'm somewhat familiar plus 20 years ago I was probably I recall part of the original permits so yeah I'm fine all right great okay um so let's see we need a motion Tom do you want me to just start with you this time uh we need a motion to uh accept the applicants requests to extinguish the previous special permits Tom don't move all right um Chris would you like us to close have a motion to close the hearing at the same time that would be lovely okay so Tom can you accept that as a yes I move to also close the hearing as well all right thank you Tom uh Andrew I will second that motion all right thank you okay uh I don't see any more hands for any discussion so we'll go right on into it and all seven members may vote Bruce I vote I Tom hi Andrew hi Janet hi Johanna hi and Karen hi and I'm and I as well all right so we extinguish and we close all right great so that was item four on our agenda it's just about eight o'clock and we normally take a five minute break at eight o'clock so why don't we do that now uh the time now is seven fifty nine why don't you come back when you're you see eight oh five on your clocks so we'll take a six minute break please turn off your cameras and make sure you're muted okay I'm seeing uh eight oh six on my computer clock so board members if you are there you can turn on your cameras and let us know you are back in the vicinity looks like we have everyone except for Andrew and Johanna uh Doug may I ask um Pam to move Bruce Allen into the panelists and and also Chris Chamberlain oh good and there's Rob too Rob Mora where is he he just came into the uh panel oh good there he is and if I could ask for Doug Sarrell who's uh with our office to be admitted to okay and they don't see Andrew yet did everybody make it now we we're still missing Andrew McDougal but we do have all the applicants attendees or representatives there's Andrew all right okay so we're all back uh the time is eight oh eight and uh I need to do another intro for another hearing this evening okay so in in accordance with the provisions of mass general law 40 chapter 40a this joint public hearing has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted and is being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be heard regarding SPP 2023-02 Bruce Allen 51 Spalding Street public hearing to request a special permit to modify ZBA FY 20 or 2007-00030 and allow three rumors with an owner-occupied dwelling unit within an owner-occupied dwelling unit construct five parking spaces previously approved and construct two parking spaces within the front setback in the northwest corner of the parcel and relocate an existing shade tree within the front setback under sections 3.3 to one zero five point zero one zero zero and seven point zero zero zero of the zoning bylaw map 14b parcel 110 in the rg zoning district first are there any board members disclosures I do not see any hands with disclosure okay um Chris do you want to say anything before we turn it over to the applicant I can I can say a few words about the project and then maybe rub more I may want to say a couple of sentences on it too so this is a project that's been around for a while the original permits were granted permit was granted in 2007 FY 2007 to allow the single-family house to be turned into a two-family house the way the house was actually built is different from the exact layout that was approved in 2007 and the number of parking spaces that were going to be built as a result of that special permit were not built so um over the years there have been a number of issues um neighbors have complained about the parking issue and have raised issues about you know how many people are living in the house and um in the past few years the applicant has um taken in borders um which under normal circumstances would be allowed by right but since this is a two-family house and the two-family house when it was originally permitted by the special permit by the zoning board of appeals um did not include the idea of um of having borders so the planning board is being asked to approve the change to the special the original special permit to allow um these borders to be there the applicant is asking for three rumors they're calling it um the applicant is also we are asking the planning board to acknowledge the new layout of the interior spaces in the house which are rendered um accurately via as-built drawings that have been prepared by the architect Laura Fitch and we're also asking the planning board to approve the parking spaces that are being proposed there are five parking spaces behind the house that are being proposed and two two parking spaces in the front setback the number of parking spaces is of course based on the number of dwelling units and the applicant has the ability to negotiate with the board about exactly how many parking spaces would be required since there are two dwelling units there's a the main dwelling unit and there's an accessory dwelling unit in the basement there would be typically two parking spaces required for each of those dwelling units and then if the applicant is going to be allowed to have three rumors there would be a requirement for one parking space for each of those rumors so that would be a total of seven parking spaces required if the applicant is allowed to have the three rumors so but those the seven parking spaces as I said is an open for negotiation under the new zoning bylaw so I think that's all I have to say except I did want to make a mention of the fact that before the current people on this meeting became involved in this project there was a CFO a certificate of occupancy granted for this project without having things built according to the plan so that was in in error that happened back then we don't really know how it happened and so now we're trying to rectify that so I don't know if Rob Mora has anything to add to my explanation and then maybe Bruce Allen would like to present the project Rob you're shaking your head so you don't need to say anything okay okay Mr. Allen you have the floor thank you Chris yeah and actually I think I'm I'll be taking the lead on this but certainly Bruce and Carol can chime in if we have questions that that they can better answer I'm Chris Chamberlain civil engineer from Berkshire design group that has been helping Bruce and Carol to get these permit plans and permit application together and in I had prepared some notes on discussing the background of this project but Chris did a better job than I would have so I think that that that timeline and understanding is pretty clear and I think that the keyword that she used just toward the end there was to was that this proposal is to rectify so what are essentially existing conditions now with permit approvals and then also to acknowledge that as part of this property where the use was originally approved and where these rumors have been added that are typically allowed by right there are requirements for certain minimum parking set by zoning which you know were not built when they should have been and so now this plan proposes to add sufficient parking spaces to bring the site within conformance with zoning another complicating factor was the fact that in 2007 that approved plan went to the conservation commission was approved at that time but those permits expire after three years so we've also brought this plan back to the conservation commission and received in order of conditions to build it in the buffer zone of boarding vegetated wetland so then what I will do is share the project plans and this is actually going to be pretty straightforward because there are only a couple of things to highlight on this plan so this is the existing property on spaulding street north being up on this plan and here is the house as it exists today multi-story house with a deck area and paved driveway in this location here and just sort of clarify some of that layout and this was discussed at the site plan there is the sort of main owner occupied house is the majority of this building and within that sort of owner occupied portion of the house is where Bruce and Carol live and associated with that are the potential are the three potential rooms to rent two of them are within the house proper and then there is a third one that's associated with the owner occupied portion of the building that exists on the basement level of this portion of the house with a separate exterior entrance that's led to a little bit of confusion about the definition of our room to rent and its association with the owner occupied portion of the house so sort of some of the other members that were there at the site visits can attest to these facts but the exit from this room leads with actually a nice covered walkway into either the main level of the house or more conveniently a basement level access that then gives them access to the house and most importantly for kitchen because the the room to rent by definition can't have a kitchen in it so that room has access there and then on the basement level of this house in roughly this location here is the second full residence I think it was referred to as an accessory but I think technically that's a slightly different definition than what we're talking about here because this is not an accessory unit but the second unit of the duplex so that's the existing site plan and then flipping to the proposed there are no architectural changes proposed whatsoever what is proposed for site work is to add on to the end of this existing driveway a an area of gravel here with five parking spaces in a row four of them full-size nine by 18 and another slightly narrower one as the zoning allows for compact parking space with new gravel surface in order to screen that area we have and to screen the area and create additional vegetated buffer to the wetlands to the east there's a proposal for a row of plantings including rona dendrons and I think these are red ozier dogwoods and Doug is going to correct me if I'm wrong on that and then the sixth and seventh spaces coming off of the street located in this area here with a new curb cut in the right of way but the space is entirely within the private property and then part of the application is that this tree which is a shade tree relatively young still at this point and not terribly big is to move this five feet to the south to make a little bit more room for this gravel parking pad which is something that's previously been discussed with the tree warden who has no problem with it in fact offered to help and you know addition to that erosion controls is required by wetlands protection and then there are floodlights on the house and we've submitted materials that those are proposed to be shielded to ensure that there's no light spill off the property but those are here to provide just safety lighting for these parking spaces to access back and forth and that is the extent to what we're doing again to sort of summarize is we want to rectify the as-built architectural condition of the house with the approval that's on file and then to provide the minimum parking spaces required by zoning and you know as Chris mentions there's the potential for negotiation over parking spaces and most of the projects we work work on that's typically trying to reduce the number of parking spaces below the what's required but that's not being proposed here by the owners they want to provide the seven that are required for the two duplex units and the three potential allowed rooms for rents and I'll leave this up. Okay thank you Chris. Chris Prestreff I see your hand. So I just wanted to clarify also and I think I mentioned this before that the other question that's before you is since this was a duplex that was approved by a special permit and the idea of rumors was not considered under that special permit the planning board also would need to amend that previous special permit to allow rumors even though rumors are ordinarily allowed in a single family house that doesn't have a special permit in this case it needs the blessing of the planning board to have those rumors there thank you. Okay all right so I know several board members came on went on a site visit and and I wondered if someone who was there yesterday would be willing to give a description of what they saw I'm not seeing any hands from one of the people who came by went went to the site yesterday okay Tom and Karen why why don't you start Tom and then Karen you can fill in the blanks. Sure no problem so um so when we arrived to the site we were actually at the the street edge at the edge of the driveway and we were able to see and locate where the two parking spots were I guess that's to the north is that correct or that's to the yes this is to the north yeah um the six and seven and and we discussed the movement of the tree which seems very small and doable in terms of moving and not too complicated which was easy to visualize with Chris's guidance and then we moved down through the driveway and explored the extension of that driveway and the area around there we talked about the wetlands we talked about where those spaces would be located we talked about the boundary area um is this is north um on the bottom here or my uh so north is up on this plan north is up guys so south um we the boundary line in the south that was actually confirmed over the last few weeks um to make sure we had some space there um we talked about plantings talked about wetlands um but mainly um we were looking back at the house from that location there was a lot of discussion about what's actually happening on the interior of that house um when we were able to look inside to the um the um rented space that is a single person dwelling without a um without a kitchen um on that first floor we were able to look inside and and um qualify that that is actually just a bedroom um with a bathroom in that space we were talking about entry and exit from that space entry and exit to the duplex apartment um that occurs underneath the deck as well we also talked about bike storage and lots of other things as well um but we really did get a lay of the land from chris um and from the um the current residents and kind of you know from that perspective really understood how the property worked and um who has access to what portion of the space and from where um so it's really informative to see now on site I think that you wouldn't necessarily see in a site plan um or the description we have here all right thanks tom caron you want to add anything to that I think that was uh pretty complete um I do see that this is going to be a gravel uh parking space and I do know that that is a problem with snow ploughing and and I know the owners mentioned that too um so in the winter time when you're going to plow gravel it's that's difficult I see this as really a problem of zoning um the neighbors have complained about parking and it's just it's a shame this whole backyard which is beautiful in front of the wetlands is going to be gravel now because of the requirement of having uh parking for each is it two places or just enough parking for these rumors and our town which is trying to densify and have owner occupied uh is what we're really aiming for because the the complaints I think on this particular um house have only been on parking it you know when the owners are there you don't have the loud part you don't the the house is maintained um so I I see that this is a dilemma that people that want to take in uh students and enjoy it and it seems like a good situation for the students are going to have to take their whole property and turn it into a gravel parking place but that seems to be what's happening here and um yeah so all right so feelings all right thank you Karen um bruce um I too was uh kind of uh overwhelmed by the proposition that the whole of the backyard so we saw that and we saw just what a a complete takeover of the rear yard uh was proposed by this and that was instructive for me the other thing I need to add I think uh Doug is that the Spaulding Street it's worth noting is whether it's a dead end shortly further up the street but it's very narrow and uh and there the verges on either side are often quite difficult particularly at this end where it's starting to go up the hill um so parking on this on the street looks awkward to begin with because the it's so narrow and the verges so it slopes off on the uh on the right hand side downward and on the left hand side often the grade goes up fairly steeply so it's the street itself is when you park on the street it you certainly notice a vehicle is there and to some degree it it it looks as though it's an imposition in the landscape at least that was my impression I think that's it thank you bruce and and I will repeat I guess what I think we've heard from Chris which is that you know we're being asked whether to allow this property to have the three borders and we're being asked to decide what is an appropriate number of parking spaces for however many occupants we are allowing in the house so you know if if we decide gee we really don't want to have the backyard full of gravel and that there ought to be fewer parking spaces that could influence the number of occupants in the house uh just and and vice versa so um tom why don't you go ahead sure I just had one other comment which was um that it seems like there's a lot of discussion and debate about parking on the street and the visibility of cars um and and while I agree with bruce and and karin about the the the parking issue basically just wiping out this what I think is a really lovely lawn it also removes the cars well from the street and buries them actually behind the house um and in a way that really removes them from the street so I think it's an opportunity to minimize complaints from the neighbors as well by really taking those cars out of the right of way and out of visibility so so there's that aspect of it I think from uh from a functional perspective that that I noticed standing at the end of the driveway you wouldn't see much of much of the parking area or at least much of the cars because of the plantings that are currently there okay jenna um I have some questions for the site visitors um because I when I look at bedroom six I'm sort of perplexed by why there's a extra sink there did you see any facilities for storing food or cooking um and then I I don't really understand from this I mean maybe if we can look at um the existing condition basement plan um I didn't really understand how the person in bedroom six got into the house and I began to wonder was that person really living in the house or occasionally a visitor but really living separately from the people in you know the household with the rumors and so if you can go to that as built and you know did you see cooking facilities or food storage facilities in bedroom six and then literally how does this person get into the house do they have to go you know through under a deck into the basement up those stairs is there another access point like do they go outside all right um before we go to the site visitors and for their observations on the on bedroom six um rob would you mind since you've toured the house as well would you mind giving us your interpretation of bedroom six and its cooking facilities and what that means or you know for the for the category that that space we should occupy in our minds sure uh so we rely on definitions of the state sanitary code for this purpose and it's something that we deal with quite often as you can imagine but um you know the the unit doesn't have a complete kitchen and to have a complete kitchen it does need to have a oven and cook top uh this unit doesn't have it uh it does have a fridge a saying a small fridge a sink and that counter space uh that you can see there in the picture right inside the doorway but it doesn't have the full um the full kitchen that would make it a a dwelling unit by definition so unfortunately we're not you know we're not able to even consider it a dwelling unit for that reason and for another reason that it only has one exit so this particular space really has no choice but to either a room be a rooming unit or some other purpose but not a complete dwelling unit to answer part of the question from my tour of the building the the occupants of building bedroom six can enter at the lower level through the doorway primarily to have access to a shared laundry facility that is there in the corner of the the lower level and then travel up the stairs and be right inside the the main kitchen of the home and that's that's the tour I took in the opposite direction when I was traveling through through the house okay thank you so now uh Bruce and Karen I think you Janet's question was directed toward you guys who were part of the site visit and how you uh what your reaction was to bedroom six um I could start I think uh I poked my head in the door the person who just uh who lives there uh had just moved in and and I guess we felt a little bit intrusive but you can see as you can see uh once the door is open wide you can pretty much see everything the counter and so forth exactly as Rob describes has a sink where you can see it and at the left hand end under the counter there's a small refrigerator and on the counter there was a microwave or a toaster oven or something so it's a it's it has food preparation capability but it doesn't rise to the level I think there was a during COVID I think the occupants I understood it of that room had purchased a small freezer that was stored in the storage area there um that gave them complete uh more or less complete uh independence even because they they could take a frozen meal and heat it up and so forth um the the owners did advise that the the way in which this room was often used uh in in the in the in the short life of its existence I suppose has been that the the person will take the room and often a student the university student and often take their meals at the university dining commons even though the room has kitchen privileges I understand it upstairs but it's it's it tends to be used by students who um might even shower and and dine and so forth at the university I uh I guess I should add that in conversation with the owners it it's um the the the owners seem to be the of a type of person who likes to have students and likes to live with students and likes to make friends at you know and have over the years of having them in their house uh some of them become uh so there's a relationship building thing it's quite it seems to be uh uh understandable and natural I have other friends in town that have uh aspired to these kind of uh rental arrangements for the same reasons but it's it's not a typical way of accommodating students I don't think because usually they they they are in the separate part of the house and I would like I have to say I didn't see this drawing and and or any of the drawings of the building and I I they weren't in the packet and and I so this is the first time I've seen it and it was going to be a question of mine how can we validate the as-built um if we haven't seen them um so I I want to ask whether I'm alone in not having seen these before okay Bruce I can tell you I saw them I saw them in the packet that was mailed to me and I believe I saw them in the PDF that was emailed out on Friday um and uh I guess others if if you did not see it in your packet please raise your hand um Karen why don't you go ahead and comment I think everything has been said um I actually I think if I were a student this would be a very desirable place a very welcoming host family and uh I I liked everything about it except the fact that the whole yard is going to be turned into gravel and in the front there are those two things I I just wish we had a way of um of being able to rent to students and requiring them not to have automobiles that would solve this so that's my only dilemma I um Karen I mean if you wanted you could propose that we accept you know the floor plans as built but we not require seven parking spaces there if you wanted to propose that you could do that so you can you can think about that yeah I'm just wondering how realistic that is and whether that is going to put the onus again on the uh parking in this narrow street and exactly what the neighbors are complaining about the fact that all of a sudden you have this influx of automobiles and I do understand that so it's it's a dilemma yeah okay thank you uh Andrew thanks Doug um yeah I had questions about bedroom six as well I mean was reading through some of the letters from the neighbors and the neighbors seemed to the letters we got like didn't seem to have a very positive opinion of what was happening here and I you know I'd love to maybe get a sense from from Bruce maybe what could be driving that um it does seem as though but I guess do does the resident of bedroom six typically prepare their meals like are they using the house commonly or do do they essentially just sort of exist on their own as if this were like its own apartment uh uh mr allen uh would you be willing to respond to that or okay she'll answer that I'll answer it hi um in room six uh right now the person actually takes the majority of the meals except for breakfast over at UMass however I have had people over the years who would just um you know they are totally fine just having uh the microwave and you know a toaster oven basically and they're you know they eat a lot of their meals a lot of my grad students they eat a lot of their meals at UMass and then they come over and they they make meals that's fine but you know they're happy with the arrangement they're very happy with the arrangement they know they can come upstairs if they want to make something if they want to make cookies and bring them in they're welcome to they can come right upstairs unimpeded um it's not a problem whatsoever and uh I will tell you people have been comfortable absolutely comfortable back there um and they you know they don't have to really it's covered area so they don't it's never been a problem for the for the person in bedroom six they like it actually it's a wonderful bedroom it's got heated tile floors um a lot of windows they've been happy there great place to study good internet they're they're pretty thrilled but one thing I wanted to say though that Bruce said mentioned about the freezer that is in the storage area uh that was actually for the elderly woman women that lived in the efficiency apartment uh at that time when covid hit uh we have a tenant who's been there for 10 years she's probably in her early fifties she works from home there uh but she had a 70 year old friend move in at the beginning of covid because they were both deathly afraid of covid and that's when the freezer showed up and we never saw them for a year and a half yeah so they stated that and now the the the older woman has since moved out so now it's just the the younger woman who was probably early fifties now is in there she's been a long-term tenant of ours so we we only have the one person in the efficiency apartment I just thought I'd clarify that that's her freezer that that has nothing to do with any of the rest of us great um can I also ask um what what other two bedrooms would typically be occupied by these three borders but typically on the second floor uh if you go to the other plan go to the upstairs so bedroom one is uh actually what we used to call the master bedroom uh that's basically where we've always stayed it's still set up as our master bedroom I mean pretty much all of my clothes are in there we got married in 2016 and that's when I moved into the house uh that was the only place I had a room to put my clothes and so uh carol and I have since moved downstairs on the on the first floor of the end of bedroom five because it's all on one floor living so bedroom one is we set aside for when her kids come to visit our guests come to visit normally what we rent out is bedroom two and bedroom three okay okay thank you very much Andrew did you have further yeah I get just a couple like you know again I take some of the concerns from from the neighbors and I understand there's like legal definition of what makes it a living space but if you've got a microwave you've got you know a fridge you've got a toaster oven I mean but a hot plate like you're a fully functioning apartment um and so I understand that like there's a legal definition I don't want to get into that that point but um it did you know I was hearing that there there's some concern that this is just a way to circumvent um zoning and essentially create a freestanding apartment um again if there if if you can live in there without having to come upstairs and be fully selfish and it would certainly kind of seem like that would be the case um I did have a question about the parking as well which was if we go back to that for a second is it looked like we had the existing grading what is the future grading it looks like there's a pretty pretty good drop there five six feet over the course of that what is the plan um is there a plan to use like retaining structure or something or is this going does does this just kind of naturally continue to follow the existing grading lines yeah it it pretty much follows existing uh I mean this from this contour which is 222 um to the corner here 219 I mean that's a three foot drop over 50 to 60 feet um and so you know there may need to be a little bit of accommodation right on this corner where it starts to drop off a little bit but I think certainly standing out there it doesn't feel too steep um in any particular direction there is a steep drop off on the southern property line um and so um there's there no ability to sort of push things in that direction um somewhat coincidence near the property line you can see where it starts to really drop off there so um there there is that that potential there but in this main part of the site um it's relatively flat uh Chris on on that topic in some of the photos and some of the correspondence it sounded like there had been some parking on the south side of the driveway over the years and you know there was there was contention about whether that was over the property line or not and I gather it's now been figured out that that's really not over the property line but is there a plan for there to be sort of guest parking in along the driveway or is there never going to be more parking along the driveway um so I can answer that part of that question I made defer to Bruce and Carol um but there is sort of a currently worn patch in this area here off of the driveway I suspect as a consequence of not having um this sort of formal parking created um there was this was in parts um our faults um in publishing the first version of the plan you know we talked early on uh this project was really focused on the conservation commission permitting and so at that time the exact location of this south boundary wasn't terribly material because what we were looking to permit was disturbances within the buffer zone um and so uh just by importing the tax map property lines from GIS uh they showed this boundary being a good bit north of where it is and actually intersected with a portion of the paved driveway and probably also some of that informal space that's used here so based on our original plan that we started with conservation with it did look like there was some encroachment off the property which you see here today which we resubmitted last week after all of the survey work was done is the surveyed property line uh with an accurate depiction and just for reference you know this line that you see traced here is the 10 foot zoning setbacks that gives you an idea of how much breathing room we have there okay so I guess the gist of that is that there is no expectation that there would be parking along the driveway once the parking lot is constructed in in the rear of the property that's correct okay thank you and then just my final thing was just what is the snow removal plan and maybe we'll get to that shortly but um knowing I mean again maybe so the parking could be flat it does drop off as you go off what what's what's the uh the proposal uh Chris I think Bruce is best to answer that but I think the key point of it is is that they do the snow removal with snow blowers and shovels typically as opposed to a plow which would have a little bit more difficulty finding some of the the green space that's outside of the 25 foot buffer which is the one condition that cons calm imposed was that beyond this 25 foot buffer they don't want to see snow storage okay so uh I I'm the person that runs the snowblower we also have a person that can plow if if we happen to not be able to or we're like out of town or something like that uh but oh you're mute no no we can hear you oh you can okay so uh so the situation is uh I've been snow plowing this driveway for over 10 years the as anyone as as the people were there yesterday paved part of the driveway drops off kind of steeply but once you get down to the gravel area someone has told me it's basically a I think a three percent grade I'm not sure what that means the other issue is is that uh I have probably for 20 years I had a huge gravel parking area in Connecticut that I routinely had to run the snowblower over so I have a lot of experience we're running a snowblower over loose gravel it's fairly simple you got to lift the front of the blower up so you don't pick up the rocks it's uh fairly straightforward it's not a big deal the uh situation though is is that uh the snow removal plan is to basically uh blow the snow to the south side uh to to just the northern part of the southern property line and put it down there and then also uh up there where you see the number the 29 foot to the 45 foot that that area there we cannot we cannot really push the snow down straight down the driveway because then we would be into the 25 foot buffer uh and that that was a thing which were excluded to do in the wetland uh condition order order of conditions uh same for the front portion there uh that's fairly straightforward uh I routinely uh run the snowblower around the walkways that go out to that area uh and it's not a real issue so um Chris uh I assume that the conditions we impose and the plan that's approved uh will be applicable even if the property changes hands is that correct which Chris are you asking I'm asking you Chris Brester yes the permit will go with the land okay so so Mr. Allen has a great deal of expertise below uh you know snow blowing on gravel but the next donor may not so or and they may not they may plow rather than you know well I would like to comment one thing and that is is that we probably all noticed there are plenty of gravel driveways in this town in very large gravel parking areas so this situation is not unique in fact many of them are right off the Spalding Street so um it's not a unique situation okay great all right uh Chris Chamberlain nice your hand is so up I did that it was up from a little while ago but I did just want to just summarize a couple of things I think that it's good the conversation about sort of how the house operates is is a good one and important to understanding how this property is going to be but when we're talking about decision making and in terms of how the zoning bylaw applies I would just say that that the legal definition is really important there and and that absence definition in the zoning bylaw which could be added that more specifically defines what that border is and maybe there is and I don't I'm I'm not familiar with all however many hundred pages that you know deferring to that sort of state code basis for making that determination is really all all that we can do I think and then you know the other thing is that that this is a little bit of an unusual situation because a special permit already existed on this site but if I'm not mistaken under current zoning if this were a brand new duplex conversion coming in in this zone that conversion would be allowed by right with site plan review but not a special permit and then the the provisions that allow the the rumors doesn't make a distinction between a single family versus duplex it talks about owner occupied residences having rooms associated with them so I think that's important context that well because of you know the the existence of the special permit we're looking for an amendment there's sort of an alternate route where that special permit you know gets vacated through one way or another and this comes back as site plan review and then those those rooms to rent sort of I believe would just be under the purview the building department so again I want to say that that nothing wrong with the discussion I think it's helpful to understand but I think that context is important and it's certainly if Chris Bester wants to correct me on any of that she she certainly should okay thank you Chris Chamberlain Chris Brestrup did you want to comment on that at all I would prefer to have Rob more comment if any comments are going to be made about the interpretation of the zoning bylaw all right Rob you want to say anything or shall we let Chris's statement stand I think most of the statement is fine I think it's important to know that you know when the bylaw does change like it did in this situation an existing special permit does not automatically disappear and it still controls the property and I think this board has experience extinguishing those special permits as they have in other cases as a way to eliminate that and allow some other development to occur by maybe a different permitting path but the special permit exists and has meaning even when the bylaw does change in the future okay thank you Rob Janet so you know when I read through this packet and the complaints by the butters and neighbors you know I'm struck I was struck by the fact that we have a special permit that was never enforced I mean a special permit that was never followed the parking was never built so there were parking problems with the butters and the neighborhood the permit the permit that was given to build you know a certain project that wasn't followed either and so we have as built drawings you know you're coming to us asking us decade or two later like oh I didn't follow what you the planning board of the ZBA said to build but can you accept these plans and so you know so it's a history of non-conformance with the special permit and so you know and so I you know I'm looking at this other request for a special permit with sort of a curious feeling of is anything going to be done or people are going to follow the rules I also like when I was looking for a house in Amherst I had the Realtor said to me a lot of people put in a sink in a bedroom with the bathroom and you know basically you know rented out they'll get it put in a refrigerator a microwave cooktop you know a convection oven and basically that's an apartment and so as long as the person has a way in and out that's kind of you know they have that as an apartment it's an informal apartment and so when I looked at these you know bedroom six and there's a sink there and you know you're you're basically saying this person my tenants or my rumors there are really very autonomous are always eating somewhere else or in their room maybe cooking coming up for cookies occasionally it looks to me like an informal illegal apartment and so I you know I don't know why that sink is there like a why is that there's a bathroom sink there's a shower and why is there why did you put a sink in there and so I just think this is being used basically as a separate apartment well Janet does that mean you you you are aiming to consider it a triplex and add another parking space because there's three units and two borders I think to me it looks like there this there's three functional units here and I would think to make to get rid of this idea of having a separate apartment informally illegally whatever is to remove the sink and remove the refrigerator and remove the cooking facilities it doesn't seem normal to me to have a rooming house with everybody cooking separately and with separate refrigerators and microwaves and ways to do that so I would I would love to see that sink gone and no cooking facilities and then it would be a rooming house where there's one common kitchen which is in our in our definitions I know a lot of people a lot of students and actually maybe even staff have live in apartments in Amherst and do a eat a lot at UMass you know get a lot of their meals so I just I just you know I've been looking at a history of non-compliance with the special permits problems with the neighbors an odd sink and it looks like a and it what it looks like to me and function a separate apartment okay thanks for that comment Bruce I did receive the the second packet I just didn't realize the extent of it I'm sorry but I have reviewed it in the course of the conversation over the last half hour and my architectural background means I can look at these things fairly quickly and and digest it reasonably thoroughly I think so I think I'm up to speed I just wanted to tell you Mr Chair that I'm I think I'm I'm good on that I have a comment and a question I noticed here that this that we are discussing the parking and and also the discussing the the the acceptance of the the as built over the original and there's kind of two separate topics so my comment on the parking provisions here is I echo the concerns of some of the other some of my colleagues here but mine is perhaps a little different I what I'm seeing in this site plan here is a very unorthodox use of a site for a relatively small house let's just say an average size house with so much parking dominating the the exterior space the yard and it's it's it's it's it's certainly unorthodox it's unconventional it's unusual and and it seems to me that whereas the current owners may have a lifestyle and so forth that validates this my concern might be for subsequent owners because it it doesn't feel like a normal house and it seems that the next life of this house the next owner if I were about to hear I would have it would take little imagination to imagine who would the next owner be and it would be someone who would basically take advantage of all this parking and possibly use it for the kind of uses that are not don't altogether augment positively a neighborhood so that would be a concern that I would expect to hear from the neighborhood and it certainly it doesn't take much imagination to see from this unconventional allocation the large amount of parking here it doesn't feel good to me that's the no that's the comment the question I have relates to the the house and the as built the permit the from was it 2007 or nine is for a two family but when I look at the house it doesn't see there doesn't I don't know how it's divided into a two family and and and if it is is there a fire separation it it seems to me as though this is a house that's a conventional one family single family house that admits rumors into it so I don't understand how the how the separation into two families exists so I guess that would be a question that I'd like answered right so why don't we a while I let's see I'm I'm forgetting the name of the woman up who was the owner who raised her hand go ahead yeah okay so first of all the house I'm going to answer the sink question all right I wanted that bedroom originally to be my bedroom so I put that sink in because I do art and I wanted a good sink because I wanted it handy right there because I do art and so I didn't want to use the bathroom sink okay that's one thing but the second thing is the way the house was designed Bonnie came they all looked I have all the proper fire stops and everything you if when you look back through my file you will see that I meet all criteria I I mean Bonnie who was the building inspector at the time I meet all the criteria for a separate unit so where you're questioning fire stops and stuff if you were to look right through the all the information that you have in the building department you will see that that was all checked so that doesn't have to be like relitigated it was completely looked at by the previous building inspector and and we were granted a a small efficiency apartment there so I don't know why that has to be in question now we we did do all the proper permits I don't we didn't yeah can I interrupt I'm not questioning the the I'm simply asking where it is and I think now I can see I was confused because there's a there's a efficiency apartment and I can see that there's exterior wall at the top and the doorway at the bottom and the wall to the bedroom six but then there's a laundry and the stair and and it it seems to it's hard for me to understand where the where the efficiency apartment begins and ends and I just wanted to make sure that that I understood that you now see it now that you're looking at the plan yeah do you understand okay so that answers the question so to get back to the other question and we answered that in in a response when carol first set out to do this renovation back in 2007 she had a plan a much more elaborate rear unit that she was going to live in and then rent out the front part and if you look at the the drawings that we had done by fitch of how the house existed prior to 2007 you'll see that it was not modified very much at all to reach what you see here as the as built drawings what happened was the absolute cost of doing the the plan that she had put forth was overwhelming and so she basically just put it together as you see it here and Bonnie was okay with it what you're seeing here is what was inspected and what the CFO was issued against and that was one of Rob's original concerns was is that what was inspected had never really uh it wasn't really on the original plan so that's the reason I mean you have to go back to to the history of what this house looked like prior to 2007 and it's very pretty similar to what it is now a bedroom six at the time was a workshop outdoor I was at workshop and where the efficiency apartment is was outside that didn't exist so I'm not sure if that answers your question but I just wanted to reiterate a little bit why things ended up being the way they are and why they are what they are now okay so that helps thank you thank you Bruce and thank you Bruce um Chris I see your hand again or still yeah well I just I don't want to lose track of some of the comments that are going um so I think I just I wanted to raise a couple of things is that you know certainly appreciate the concern where what was built varied from the approved plan and fortunately I can I can say this part because Rob wasn't the building inspector at that time is that that the mechanism the town has to ensure that happens is with the building department when that building permit gets pulled it's supposed to reflect the the approved plan or the permit should be denied and I think that I can appreciate some of the concerns that are being raised but but many of them I think are issues with the zoning and I think that what we're talking about with with a room that has a sink like that you know based on the text of zoning is it is now it qualifies as a room to rent and perhaps it shouldn't but but I think that's that's an issue of the zoning and the other thing I want to highlight on the site plan is that well it feels like this parking area dominates the open space because when you come on this site you see this lawn and you see that most of it's going to be filled by a parking lot I do want to highlight that almost half of this property is actually protected open space because it consists of wetland and buffer so while stepping on the site this doesn't really look like part of the property there actually is quite a lot of green space here that can never be touched so thank you answer that now so I didn't forget later all right karen you are next karen you're muted yes you are muted sorry I think many of my concerns have been answered by Chris that's really interesting I I didn't realize that all that wetland was really part of the property but pursuing this I wonder am I able to make a motion that part of these rooms can be only rented out to people that have no cars is that even possible well I think you can certainly make a motion that you know and it will either be seconded or not at any time I do I think we ought to let all the comments come from the board and then I want to give the public a chance to comment too since this has been a particularly controversial property from the point of view of some of the public so if you can hold on on on on on making a motion I'm not planning to I was just asking if that was even something that that one can do or if they are legally required if you're going to have a room to provide these two parking plots that was my question I'm I I think the questions we're going to be needing to decide is how many borders are allowed in the owner-occupied part of the property and how many parking spaces do we want to allow on the property all right Mr. Allen your hand is raised oh I had already asked you so that's our legacy all right thank you I will drop your hand uh Janet your hand is up so I um I wanted to talk about parking too um and I did think that putting those two spaces in the front and all the spaces in the back just the ones in the front just seemed kind of randomly they're not they don't seem connected with the driveway or kind of where you would normally see parking spaces so I have my question is like it looks like why aren't these back parking spaces closer to the building like could you pull them closer to the building and maybe add a sixth space like what's you know this teeth in between and then could you make the driveway a little wider and have some parallel um parking on the I believe it would be the north side of the property you know so you could have a few cars parked there maybe a few in the back and get rid of these two spaces up front and you know just to help and maybe also just to help that woman across the street who needs you know full space for her um to get to her ramp maybe we can just have some you know blocks put up there or rocks or something to prevent people from parking there I just it just seemed like there is a lot of parking on this property I'm not convinced that we need seven spaces but I didn't like those two out front and I wondered if we could bring in some more spaces in a in a conventional driveway or move parking closer to the house if that was if there's you know flexibility in that Chris Chamberlain yeah so what what's not picked up on the survey here is there is a walkway next to the deck which accesses a garage not really a garage space but a space with a with an overhead garage door which is where the bike parking is actually and is also access to the entrances that you see on the basement level right here and then additionally there are existing trees they're not huge trees so I mean if that were something the board would insist on we could with Bruce and Carol whether they'd be open to changing the vegetation here but there there are existing trees in this location and so that's why this was sort of the limit of where we wanted to impose on the parking and you know as for the spaces along the driveways of possibility I think the I won't speak entirely for them but I think that that the owner doesn't necessarily have an issue with that but you know there was expressed concern about the existing sort of informal use of this location here as parking and so what we looked at was these you know pair of head end head in spaces which is actually very similar to a situation that that you see up and down the street and I think we heard that from from the site visit but I think from our perspective we're potentially open to talking about this although I'd love to get Bruce and Carol's thoughts on that oh you know I also I think I meant the north side too like north of like the north side of the of the driveway oh a new driveway with parallel spots on the north side of the existing driveway oh I see oh so then there I would highlight that there's a steep grade right here you can see there's one two three four five-foot drop on the north side of the drive so you'd have to carve it out okay right let me let me just comment here the I put together a whole dissertation of how people park on Spalding Street and hopefully all of you have read it the association with curb cuts there the this type of parking on the south side of on the east side of Spalding Street is quite common if you would drive up and down the street mainly because the the public right of way is very narrow on this side of the street the majority of all people on this side on this side of the street park in the right of way in a very similar fashion of this so it is not unusual on the street to see a front parking area like this in fact it makes it better for our our handicap person across the street mainly because the end of her ramp is really right across from that parking area and that helps now because no one can help park in the street in front of her in front of her ramp so it actually helps her to actually have those two spaces there and again you know if you get a chance go ahead and read the the information I sent about what parking looks like on the street and you'll see that this is quite common on this room and does not stand out okay I want to say something okay I have one more question about parking how many cars are you do your rumors and you usually partly have do you usually have seven cars or five cars or four well here's a situation the situation is you can never control whether a tenant has a car it's impossible because we've had I mean right now we have two tenants that don't have cars but we've had tenants that move in they don't have a car and then they go out and buy a car and and all of a sudden they're parking in your driveway so what do you do you what do you how do you kick them out you can't do that you can't control people and their cars you can put it I mean unless we want to uh I know how do you kick people out I don't know but but what am I saying is historically we've had as few as two cars uh we've had as many as as seven cars it varies okay let me okay number one I'll talk about those two spaces first of all I'm 70 years old I've got a lot of artificial parts and I've got them in my back I've got them in my feet and I've had a lot of injuries that double parking space will uh there is already an existing walkway that will go to a little deck that's on the side of my house that I can get into the house with only three stairs I see it as an aging in place I plan on being in this house to age in place and I need to be close by see the little deck that you can see there it only has a couple of stairs if I park there my car is very close to where I can get up those couple of stairs and right into the house and go straight into the kitchen or the bedrooms so that is really important to me those two little spaces now over to answer some of the other questions since I've been here a lot longer than my husband 37 years so I will say that I have taken people without cars before I've said nope can't have a car I'm looking for somebody without a car and I think that is definitely possible but it is difficult I'm not saying it isn't impossible um the fact of the matter is there are two of us and there we do have the auxiliary apartment and I think by uh what we're supposed to have for that is two spaces I believe for the apartment so that puts us at four um we could stipulate that the the our duplex apartment would only have one parking space um and that could be a possibility that makes three but I really think that usually we have four cars here sometimes we have we've had six cars here but I will tell you the real problem is that my neighbor across the street not my other neighbors but the neighbor directly across the street um that would be Rebecca uh DeCorsi Cornell who is the property manager she believes that it is no one can be parking on the street that's what she believes she she doesn't agree that we can be parking on the street at all and she also doesn't believe that any tire should be on grass no matter what and so she constantly has called me out non-stop for that specifically parking anywhere where there's one inch of your tire on grass she doesn't like it now so miss albano I just want to let you know that uh miss cornell is is in the public attendees that's fine and then that she will get a chance to comment this evening and I don't want this to become too there's one more thing we just found out the property line was farther over than we knew before so I I don't know whether the planning board would let us put four cars next to the house in that property line but we could possibly pave and have four cars there and two cars in the front which would give us six I think we could do it with six we could live our lives and not park on the street and it would work for us but it would require us to redraw the plans but we could do that and okay if that would still qualify uh putting again we'd have to move the the paved parking lot over and make it wider and there would have to be four cars there and the two in front and then we would end up you having to add in the back so that's another idea thank you very much okay um so we've heard from janet and we've heard from bruce um before I go to public comment andrew or tom or johanna uh do you want to comment at all at this point or do you want to wait until after public comment oh gosh I don't know I mean the whole situation just seems like a big pickle it seems like there was a special permit and then the work wasn't done and you know it's non-compliant with the parking requirements I too feel like gosh it's a shame to put a big impermeable parking lot close to wetlands and you know eliminate open space but it seems like the the status quo is untenable you can't have you know cars on a butters properties and you can't have cars obstructing the road in ways that you know create problems so um I don't know I mean it seems to me this solves some of like the solve some of that right so by the way the parking might be considered permeable because it's gravel yeah I yeah might might I don't know you know the engineer's not going to attest to that it's not a you know it's not a truly permeable right surface so okay those are my thoughts all right I just want to say that in 2007 wetlands permit it was required to be a permeable gravel parking area so that's in the original permit that had to be gravel right and they wanted us to have four in the back yep okay all right so at this time why don't we go to public comment oh Nate go ahead hi Doug for everyone who's been listening I'm Nate Maloya planner with the town there is the development application report I don't know if you want to go over that after the comments or yep at some point you know when when it would be a good time to do that okay would it be now or after public comment well given that you're struggling to stay with this you want to go ahead now I'm not struggling too much but um well the coffee doesn't last forever it doesn't so you know there was a development application report provided by staff bruce responded to it you know I think you know there are waivers requested as far as the application you know a sign plan you know they're not proposing any a waiver for traffic impact statement a lighting plan a soil erosion plan you know that's taking care of with their conservation commission approval they're asking for a waiver from construction logistics plan and pollution hazardous material plan so there are waivers with this in the report you know there's for issues to consider you know there wasn't much with the building and architecture although it wasn't built according to plans you know it is it is what it is so it's existing conditions um with the landscape and site improvements you know there was a discussion about the parking spaces what's in the front of the house and if you know if there could be screening along the the driveway you know between the driveway and the property boundary to the south and so you know whether that's in the form of vegetation or a fence you know is there a way to prevent people from parking off the driveway as is happening now so you know Chris Chamberlain mentioned that cars park off the driveway and is there a way to kind of ensure that that wouldn't happen you know on the apron or just off the driveway there wasn't really many issues with the utilities or storm water in part because it doesn't really you know the project is not that big in terms of lighting they provided you know images of the dark sky compliant shields so I think that was something you know asked for locations on plan so they responded to that site management plan they you know they provided that the order of conditions does include a provision that snow cannot be stored within the 25 foot buffer zone and it has been mentioned it could be important to reiterate as a condition and then you know parking in circulation you know we noted just that there is these two curb cuts and you know is it appropriate to have the two spaces out front in the front set back and that that's really it you know the town engineer said that typically two curb cuts would not be allowed on a property unless it's through a special permit or a site plan review so typically you know if someone is developing a property we want to limit it to one one you know driveway apron unless it is by a land use permit so he didn't have any you know there was no objection just an acknowledgement that this would be the process to allow that. Nate I did notice that you you pointed out that the fire department and the town engineer have not submitted comments is that a reason for us to have to continue this or delay deciding anything tonight? So I think the town engineer had responded after the fact and I think just had that one comment about you know the a land use permit would allow the two driveway curb cuts and I'm not aware if fire has responded. I've been out for a few days. Chris Prestre, are you waiting for comments from fire? I do not know if comments have been received maybe Pam knows because Pam usually sends out the transmittals. We have not received comments from fire I've actually sent them a second a second request asking for those but we haven't received them yet. So Chris Prestre is that a you know is that a critical part of this process and that we we're probably going to not even be able to close this tonight if we wanted to? Well it's a normal part of the process and it seems like there have been a number of questions that have arisen that the applicant may want to talk to their engineer about you know some other possible solutions to things and so it may be reasonable to continue this public hearing to a date certain to wrap it up. Okay all right so I'm going to go ahead to public comment. I know we've got a couple members of the public that probably want to speak. So at this time attendees of the public would you please raise your hand if you are interested in making a comment. This is your chance to make your statement. Okay I do not see any hands raised for public comment. One that's just popped up. Oh okay yep there we go. Would you please bring Rebecca Cornell over into the panelists and Ms. Cornell if you would give us your name and your address of residence and you will have three minutes for your comment. Hi my name is Rebecca DeCorsi Cornell. I live in West Brookfield. I'm here for my family who owns a property at 60 Spalding Street. Thank you all for getting through a very challenging permit. I think you all hit all the issues on the head. You have discussed everything that I have discussed since 2009. This is 13 years. I have been trying to get my neighbor to put in parking to accommodate her tenants because they park on the street and she does not control them. She admitted that tonight she can't control the tenants. It might seem like a lot of gravel but if you go up and down Spalding Street on a small dead end street that's what we have to do in our neighborhood to accommodate. I heard her say tonight that she would be happy with six cars four out back and two in the front. I would be very happy with six cars four out back and two in the front because the code enforcement team has documented that there are five cars that are repeatedly parked there and several of them have been parked illegally. Other than that I mean we rent out rooms in our house across the street and it is a great situation to just have international people come in, become part of your family and that's how we pay our taxes quite honestly. Other than the parking I have no problem with this at all. It is just the parking which is what I'm really asking you to find a resolution to tonight. Thank you all very much. Thank you Ms. Cornell and thank you for your statements of support about the about six parking spaces and that you do appreciate the benefits of renting to students. So that at least from the public point of view oh okay we have a second hand from Amy Gates if we could bring her over please give us your name and your street address. Yes my name is Amy Gates I'm at 54 Spalding Street which is sort of across the street from Carroll and Bruce and my issue I have a few things that concern me deeply this the idea of seven parking spaces there's no one not one house on Spalding Street has seven parking spaces the only one that does is the one that's right off of Main Street and that's all students and my feeling is you know they're not going to have this house forever I think Bruce Colvin do I have that right you brought that up that you know thinking big picture in the future this is not conducive to keeping the street a calm quiet little residential street if it's suddenly going to have seven parking spaces and I also have a trouble I have trouble with the idea of gravel because no matter what you do gravel leeches and leaks and gets everywhere and I'm concerned that it's going to slowly make its way down towards the wetlands and in terms of snow blowing I've had my window broken because you know someone's snow blowing and the gravel hit my window it's just snow blowing and snow plowing is not really ideal on gravel and again someone mentioned that yes while Mr. Allen may be an expert at it the next person won't be but really I'm just thinking about this the spillage of it eventually it just works its way with rain it just does I know because I live I live with it and the other thing I'm concerned about is proper plantings I don't know if on the south side there's a house that you know the headlights are going to be looking right into the house that abuts this green space and so I'm wondering if there are going to be any kind of plantings on that southern side to help the neighbor there and what the proper positioning is because you know whatever's put in is going to take years years to grow to be any kind of realistic screening I just I don't think we can minimize the impact of having seven spaces for one house it's just to me it's so it sounds like you also would be supportive of fewer parking spaces yes very much very much yes okay but we need to make sure there's enough so that people are not parking on the street yes yes that I understand that I understand and the lighting I just want to make sure if there's floodlights that they're truly going to be not pointing in our houses at night that's another issue that concerns me thank you okay let's see so we have another hand from the public Mr Rob Crowner if you would bring Rob over into the panelists for those of you don't know I think Rob was a longtime member of this planning board before he he retired to other pursuits please give us your name and your street address Rob hello thanks for the introduction I'm Rob Crowner 44 Spalving Street so I'm wondering whether your acceptance of it's been talked about accepting the existing plans whether that enshrines this use as a duplex when it's clear from almost everyone who's mentioned it that that second unit is actually an accessory dwelling um and so I'm wondering whether there's an opportunity to fix the the use category for this property to be a single family home with an accessory dwelling which is allowed okay that is a question which I would want to have Rob more away in on before we got very far into it we have heard from Rob that he considers that the bedroom number six not to be a dwelling unit because it didn't have adequate or sufficient kitchen cooking equipment Rob so I didn't really see that as a possibility as a solution so there's the two dwelling units the main house the efficiency unit and then bedroom six which has been in question the bylaw only allows an accessory dwelling unit accessory to a single family dwelling so we can't have a third unit that's an accessory dwelling unit and if we only had two units and one of them being an accessory dwelling unit we also cannot also have lodgers and borders as accessory uses under article three so that did just didn't seem like it fit what the owners were trying to do so we didn't really consider that as an option because it would significantly change the use from what they're envisioning and you know create a lot of space in the house that probably wouldn't be usable uh in that that type of permitting path okay thank you so if we continue to consider this a duplex you know we are being asked to accept the plans as they've been built and at least according to Rob it's considered a duplex with you know the the efficiency apartment and then the rest of the house which has up to six bedrooms if we accept that then we can have a conversation about how many parking spaces are appropriate for that kind of building given what you've heard this evening Mr. Allen and Ms. Albano would you like to go back and think about adjusting the plan to maybe go from seven to six and uh I know there's been concern about the gravel and it migrating and you know maybe it would be worth thinking about something that's a little bit more durable um so I I posed that question to you it sounds like we're probably going to need to continue this hearing to another date anyway so we'll go as far as we we need to this evening uh but it is 935 and we've been at it for three hours so would you guys want to make a comment I see you are muted uh first thing I wanted to point out if you if you look at the information I sent you about Spalding Street there was a whole section on curb cuts uh we have one house on Spalding which actually has over three curb cuts we have a number of places which have at least two curb cuts uh we have a curb cut at the end of the street which is 60 feet wide so adding an additional curb cut on the front of this house is not going to be any different than any of the other houses along the street and so I just wanted to point that out secondly I know in a lot of towns they are encouraging gravel parking because uh because it is it is pervious as opposed to asphalt which is not and we had always thought that it was more environmentally friendly to use gravel than asphalt because of all the runoff associated with it and how it's impact on the wetlands would be because it would all drain into the wetlands the wetlands administrator here had said she approved the gravel mailing because she knows most of the water coming down the driveway is going to just settle in that gravel and just going to seep right in just like it is now and it will have no effect on the wetland and so that was the main concern with with using gravel because it's considered more environmentally friendly uh than than asphalt okay thank you uh uh Chris Brestrup I will tell you I don't remember seeing a synopsis from Bruce Allen describing the curb cuts along Spalding street I think they came they came in an email so that was one of the six files we got later yes you got several files after you received your original packet and you may not have all had a chance to read those files they are all posted online now Pam has been posting them as each document comes in but you may not have had a chance to read all of them so that may be another reason to continue this okay yeah I did open a couple of those but I did not open all six yeah there were we addressed a couple of things there including um some cut sheets on the lighting and um revised plans that show the surveyed property line and things of that nature okay Chris uh Brett Chris Chamberlain I wanted to ask you uh since the topic of of migration of gravel has come up uh would there be an option to put a some sort of curb at the east end of this parking lot so that uh you know there's there's there's at least gravel isn't going to wash down um you know I also wondered about whether there should be some sort of fence at the east end so that no no plow would ever push snow beyond that um I don't know if either of those are really feasible or worth the effort but uh they came to mind yeah I I mean I certainly wouldn't recommend a fence in that location just to cut things off uh it's sort of a fence in the middle of the properties and an odd solution anyway we are we do have the buffer plantings that were required by conservation um and you know and I would also just highlight that to the extent any of that concern is related to the wetlands is that you know we did go through the notice of intent process and and those issues were scrutinized as part of it and as Bruce mentioned you know back all the way back in 2007 conservation was actually looking for gravel as opposed to an asphalt surface all right thank you uh you know other than adding cost uh yeah uh for for a limited benefit wouldn't be the end of the world but um I'm not sure how much benefit that would create okay all right so um the time is 940 and I know we have a couple more things on the agenda this evening so I see uh the owner's hand I see Janet's hand I see Karen's hand why don't we run through those comments and then talk about potentially continuing this hearing so uh Mr. Allen and Ms. Albano okay so our intention is to is stage in place here and really we do need that those front two parking spaces in order for easy access we I'm telling you that that's essential but um for us I mean Ambrose an expensive place to live when you're retired we need the renters to be there we can't afford that house without the renters we have had absolutely zero problem our problem has only been the parking so I mean all of a sudden we're doing talking all this other stuff we haven't had any problem or complaint by a tenant or anyone regarding that it's just been the where how to put the cars best and so forth so I'm very frustrated I've got taxes there are 13,000 and a half dollars it's a lot of money for a retiree and I'm really distressed at the thought that you're going to try to make it so I can't afford to live here all right so I I I hope I I'm sorry if I gave you that impression you know we've had a number of comments this evening and there have been a lot of ideas thrown out so by continuing this hearing you can think about whether you want to make any changes or whether when we resume the hearing you want to keep the current plan as the plan we are to be considering so I apologize if I was uh suggesting more too strongly that you consider changes well we've complied with everything you've asked you asked for you've asked for us to and and when we do do this plan up we didn't actually have an accurate boundary line now we do actually you know there are different things but the bottom line is we have complied and Rob more will tell you we have complied with all the things that we were asked as we're going through this process trying to work this out I mean I hope you're going to work with us the other thing I would like to do I would like to encourage the committee members to actually drive up and down Spalding Street to get an idea of what it really looks like that's why I did the presentation I did it's it's it's a little more unusual it's not like South Whitney and it's not like Shumway Drive it's not like those but I encourage you to come up and do a site visit and see what the street really looks like and you'll see that what we've proposed is is within keeping with what everyone else does on this street and we don't stand out with what we're proposing and and I just want you to look at that in context because we don't want to spoil this neighborhood we like living here we have a lot of great neighbors it's a dead end street so it's quiet it's safe we don't have any crime or anything like that and we like it and we don't want to stand out and we won't stand out but you have to see it in context with what the way the rest of the street looks before you make a decision about that I just wanted to point that out and those ever ever source trucks had to go up and down because they were building and taking all those big timbers out they never had a problem with going around any of the cars not one time and there's been a lot of those big trucks so it's not like oh it's a generic the other thing I'll point out is we do have a lot of self-employed people on the street who have their uh you know that have their clients park on the street so on street parking here is fairly common the only reason we're not supposed to park on the street is by the rental the rental bylaws if we're a landlord we have to provide parking for our tenants on our property we cannot have them park on the street and I make maybe you're aware that maybe you're not aware of that but that's what got us in this difficulty in the first place so okay thank you all right so let's move on Janet quick one one more quick comment this is very quick I wanted to speak in praise of gravel um I have a gravel driveway and we we use a snow blower on it and when we had a snow plow it was just pushing they were pushing the gravel all over the place so the gravel actually there is some runoff from it but most of it just goes into the soil I have more runoff on you know off my lawn than I do the gravel and then I have a bunch of um um shrubs planted at the end and they kind of stop the you know the spillover and stuff like that so I do think it's a very um environmentally friendly thing and you can snow blow it I wouldn't suggest a snow plow okay thank you my plow thank you my grab Karin you're on I wanted to say once more how really charmed I was by visiting you and your house and what a welcoming place it is for students so I I really feel that we're trying to work with you to have the best solution for everybody and um I also hate asphalt driveways and have a gravel have always had gravel and I told you about the the um oil and stone which is I think really beautiful and we have a kind of a stone barrier but there's also other alternatives that I maybe they're very expensive you know those kind of pavers that are uh sort of they they have holes in the middle and it even looks like there's grass uh it could be very beautiful I don't know if you've looked into anything like that but especially for the two in front of the house I think they could be uh very unproblematic and very beautiful but anyway so uh I'm sure we'll find a good solution for you thank you thank you Karin um Mr. Allen I think that's a legacy that's a legacy all right we'll drop that hand okay so thank you all for your comments thank you thank you uh consultants and owners for your presence this evening um thank you to the uh public that attended I did see a hand for a while from Amy Gates and it looks like we've lost her so maybe she'll come back to the next hearing Chris do you have a suggestion for a date for our next hearing I think October 19th would be a good date for this one because September 21st is really full okay uh do we have a date or a time that you would suggest um I don't think we have any cases on that night yet if Pam would um confirm that for me so the only other thing we talked about earlier was if the flood maps don't happen on the 21st they would happen uh on this night as well so we could put this one first we could say this is at 635 October 19th okay all right um I guess uh does anybody want to make motion to continue this hearing to October 19th at 635 p.m. I so move thank you thank you Janet and uh Andrew you got your hand up before Tom second okay uh Mr. Allen your hand is again up is that a legacy yes no you are muted you'll need to unmute my general impression here is that you're concerned about the number of parking spaces I'm just trying to get a feel for what the board thinks at this point well we've heard from a couple of members there's a couple of us that haven't really commented um I was sorry to miss the site plan or the site uh visit last yesterday I will make a point of driving down your street and looking at those at the parking uh habits I guess I'll say and because I have questioned in my own head the the two spaces that are on the street but if that is a typical condition then maybe it's more uh acceptable um we we definitely want to solve the parking problem so um reducing the number of spaces seems a little bit risky to me actually um but uh so you know I'm not you know I'm I'm not sure how much time you want to spend with your engineer but um you certainly could look at a six space layout and um it sounds like your neighbors at least would be acceptable okay with that and then um you know we can see what that looks like or you could just come back with what you've already shown and we can kind of take it or leave it um I don't know we'll we'll discuss after after the meeting in in the yeah I'm sure I'm sure you will um we haven't heard from Andrew and Tom and I don't I I hope they will comment if they want to uh Chris I see your hand up Chris Brester I just wanted to note that one of the dwelling units is very small one of the duplex dwelling units and I think you could make an argument that that dwelling unit only needs one parking space and so then you would be down to six parking spaces two for the main unit one for the um additional unit and then one for each of the rumors if you chose to allow all three rumors right and I will mention to Chris Chamberlain um there was something in the one of the parking bylaws that the parking a parking space of five spaces or more had to be designed so that you could turn around and exit and the eastern most space didn't look like it had a hammerhead that would let you back out and turn around and then head west so if we lose a space maybe we lose the eastern space leaving you with the the space for the hammerhead uh I think that's fair it I think it works as is but it's tight yeah okay um Andrew yeah just a quick comment so I did I shared some opinions I'm I'm for the record I'm fine with six parking spaces if if that's the direction folks want to go um so okay thank you uh I I take back uh my comment that you hadn't said anything all right um so the time is 951 we let's see um does anybody else want to make the motion to continue to october 19th at 6 35 p.m you've already made the motion and oh good oh good I'm okay you know it's late um yeah all right let's go ahead and and vote on that um starting again with bruce yes and tom hi andrew hi janet hi yohana hi karen hi and i'm and i as well so that's unanimous the time is 951 and thank you all for this uh your participation in this hearing great thank you okay the next item on our agenda for this evening is the planning board elections and reorganization um christ do you want to say anything uh I believe we need to vote for our chair our vice chair our clerk and then we need to appoint the representatives to the different liaison positions that we are that we participate in yes what you need is a planning for everything yep you need a plan your valid planning commission planning board rep you need someone for the community preservation act committee and you need someone for design review board you already have janet mcgowan on the solar bio working group and for community resources um you have me because there's not usually a planning board representative representative on that group so that's what you need okay all right so um why don't we start with the elected positions and that would start I guess with the chair does anybody want to make any nominations for the chair or volunteer to do that andrew I'd like to nominate Doug Marshall for our chair okay thank you Johanna I second that motion okay thank you both are there other suggestions or nominations for the chair don't all speak at once so I am willing to continue as chair if if so elected um christ should we would should we go ahead and vote on each one at a time and then yes move on to the next okay all right so um let's see andrew made the motion Johanna seconded uh I guess we'll vote on whether Doug Marshall should be the chair for another year uh starting with bruce yes and tom hi and Andrew hi and janet hi Johanna hi caron hi and I probably feel like I should abstain so it carries six in favor and one abstention all right the next position is uh vice chair and I will I personally will nominate tom long he has served with distinction um uh in this past year so that is my motion or my nomination I will say if anybody wants to second that or anybody has any other nominations andrew I would second that okay uh janet I saw some fingers from you was that that was my second but it was it wasn't clear okay do we have any other nominations for the vice chair and tom are you willing to serve as vice chair yes that's fine thank you okay all right so uh we have one nomination and a second and so why don't we go ahead with that vote uh bruce oh yes and uh tom oops and andrew hi and janet hi and Johanna hi and caron hi and I am an I as well six in favor one abstention all right uh our previous clerk has come off the board so we we need a new clerk and um in the sort of two and a half years I've been on the board I think the primary job of the clerk is to actually run the meeting if both the chair and the vice chair are absent our clerk hasn't really done any special minute taking uh although all of us pitched in at one point last year when we were behind on minutes so tom I see your hand first a nomination for clerk I would say the uh longest longest standing member janet should um be our clerk janet McGowan nominated as clerk andrew I was going to nominate janet as well so I'm happy to hear that I will second that all right all right do we have other nominations for clerk no please you want to nominate someone janet I I would love not to be clerk I don't I don't think it's going to be a particularly onerous position what about Johanna do you have a position I I don't I would be nominate no Johanna is a clerk in a friendly way but you don't have to accept well let's see I would I would second Johanna if if if she would accept such a position I think I would I mean I watched Maria can I just wax poetic for a second and share my thoughts so there were a couple of moments over the course of the last couple of years where Maria took live minutes during the meeting I think that is in her role as clerk you know filling in for Pam I'd be happy to assume that role and with the you know I don't know if yeah if the chair and the vice chair are unavailable I'd be happy to chair the meeting so but we do have a motion on the table that was seconded we need to take we have we now have two nominations both which were seconded um and Janet does it is it is it am I am I interpreting correctly that you would prefer not to be clerk yes you're interpreting that also I'm I'm kind of busy on the other um I'm sorry working just took minutes for so um Tom did you want to say something can I withdraw that nomination thank you thank you I I guess so and so Johanna if you are if you're willing we will go ahead and vote you it sounds like okay yeah I'm willing I mean it doesn't seem like a huge time commitment outside of meetings and that's my we did have we did we did have that point last year where we got way behind on minutes and um and I did ask Maria to take take a couple to to to help you know Chris and Pam get caught up on the other ones so uh that could happen but we seem to be keeping up better now so um I think it's less likely okay so uh Tom your hand again is that true no okay Mr Marshall I'm not sure who seconded Johanna uh I did actually you did okay yes for the record for the record okay so uh why don't we vote on Johanna for clerk and we'll just run through it again uh Bruce yes and Tom all right and Andrew I and Janet that was a yes I I sorry uh Johanna hi yeah hard hi all right now I'm an I as well so that's all seven in favor so congratulations to all the new officers okay so moving on to our liaison positions let's start with the PVPC and I know that Bruce has expressed a willingness at least uh to take that position are there other nominations that people would like to make actually why don't I nominate Bruce for that position if we're gonna keep up with the seconds and all that stuff so somebody out of second Bruce um Tom my second Bruce okay are there any other nominations for the liaison to PVPC I don't see any uh Bruce are you okay with that still yes uh yes I was and I'm especially okay uh having read uh Jack's uh report and the and the various correspondence I'll probably I don't know Jack from a bar of soap but I think I'm going to get to know him uh very shortly after tonight he's much much more interesting than a bar of soap I can tell you okay good so uh Chris do we need to vote on that I would vote yep okay all right so can we do it just by a show of hands sure we know all right uh all hands well no you know what you can't do that and it needs to be a role you got to take it a roll call all right all right so uh this is to not to nominate or appoint Bruce as our liaison to PVPC Bruce how do you vote well following Joanna's uh precedent yes all right Tom hi and Andrew hi and Janet hi Johanna hi and Karen hi and I'm an I as well seven all right all right that was Bruce for PVPC now CPAC um Andrew you I'm going to nominate Andrew Andrew has done this the last year maybe two um when you took the position originally you had a little concern about your travel schedule and how has that worked and are you willing to continue doing it um travels work fun I'm willing to do it I will say that it is a it's actually a pretty exciting committee to be on because you help distribute funds to to really worthy projects so again happy to do it um but it it's it also can be very rewarding if somebody else wants to uh be considered okay all right um so are there others that would would like to do it I mean Tom I see your hand I'm I'm just seconding seconding your nomination of Andrew okay all right so okay so as does anybody else you know want to particularly want to do that I mean it's sounds like Andrew's having a good time with it all right so we'll let that go and uh another vote here for Andrew as liaison to CPAC um we'll start at the other end this time Karen hey and Johanna hi and Janet hi and Andrew I'm staying and Tom hi and Bruce yep all right so that's and I'm an I as well that's six in favor and one extension all right then the last appointment is to the DRB the design review board um I guess I'll hold off at this point does anybody want to volunteer or nominate someone else uh Tom Long has been our representative to that board Andrew I would nominate Tom again okay I will second all right uh does anybody else want to make some nominations or volunteer okay I guess we should always do this at 10 o'clock at night nobody's coming up with any new ideas all right so uh go we will vote on Tom for the DRB liaison starting with Karen hi and and Johanna hi all right Janet hi Andrew hi Tom hi and Bruce yep and I'm an I as well okay excuse me so uh that's that's everything I believe Chris that's right yep um all right so that was the end of topic number six on our agenda the time is 10.05 Doug I have to leave I'm sorry to say but I I'm camping and I need to get back before like I'm locked out all right well happy trails thank you bye bye so Janet left us at 10.06 all right the next topic is old business anything you want to bring up Chris I can't think of anything all right the next is new business anything on that category I can't think of anything can Pam think of anything no uh well the only thing I would say is that we're working on a new way to post the packets so stay tuned okay great um so the next item number nine on our agenda is form A and R so it sounds like there is one of those there is one it's Nate still with us he is he is he's hi Nate I have some pictures Nate I think the picture is explained at all no um so it's the street 1720 yeah so it's a property on you know far down in southeast street and uh um you know they're proposing to carve well you know they're showing that they have the ability to carve off this little house lot shown in blue here and you know there's some questions about whether or not uh there are the right dimensions from the existing structures in terms of setbacks and everything so they confirm that with survey so there is you know this is um you know it could actually be um you know it's a separate lot there although it is a funny shape it needs the dimensional requirements and everything and and the circle that we usually have fits in the yeah yeah you can see that in the bigger plan but okay all right all right um so they're they're separating this out into a separate lot um and uh it sounds like Nate and Chris you don't think there's any subdivision approval required no all right so does the board um authorize Doug to sign the plan uh or I'll put it a different way does anyone object to my uh signing the plan on behalf of the board so if you object please raise your hand okay Chris I'm not seeing any hands raised so we'll have to make an appointment right another clandestine meeting behind town hall okay so that is uh item nine on the agenda the time is 10.09 upcoming zba applications uh looks like we have one or two here you have two the first one and it's getting late so I'll do my best to articulate this so this first one um um is at 615 Main Street and it is for two concrete pads right here um and it's two in order to um construct fiber telecommunication cabinets so let's see which picture was I on here it is the picture is just a little bit better here um this one when I talked to Maureen Pollock about it she was like it was it's you know it's pretty pretty much just an ordinary um you know application and the second one that's going to come up again on September 22nd so this one is a little bit bigger this is a proposal happening over um at Applewood and they are proposing to construct three new buildings so this is going to be a little pool pavilion right here this is going to be an addition onto this end of the building this will be all residential it will be three floors with two units on each floor so six units there and then this spot here is going to contain a new meeting room and there's going to be a winter garden and there's also going to be two additional units housed here which I believe is on the second floor here so that's a that's a much bigger application all right so board members are these of particular interests that you want us to bring them to a future meeting I will say that personally I'm I'm not sure we really need to see either one uh if you particularly want to see one of these would you please raise your hand sure uh I don't see any hands raised uh so Pam and Chris why don't we let those go by and ZBA can handle them on their own okay dope thank you very much okay so the time is 10 11 and we're up to upcoming SPP SPR and SUB applications anything to report no I know no not at this time nope good glad to hear it at this time of night planning board committee and liaison reports we don't have a pvpc committee liaison report I assume and uh Andrew anything on cpaq we did have a meeting um a week two two weeks ago um it was just good kind of going over the initial timeline uh we will regroup in October but the application window has opened it's open for the the month of September uh so if you have or aware of anybody who might have interest please direct them to the website to the town's website to get the application process done some folks um have uh had you know questions throughout the process so it's it's good to get that in early in case uh there is some question okay thank you tom anything for drb um I was not at the latest meeting I was traveling which I missed the planning board meeting um I will catch up and I will actually get notes from that and report next time okay thank you um Janet oh Janet's gone so I guess we'll wait to hear on solar bylaw later um CRC Chris um the CRC is going to be reviewing the flood mapping project tomorrow um they've been spending their time recently on the rental registration um but tomorrow is going to be mostly about flood mapping so other than that I don't really have anything to report okay thank you um okay the last next item is report of the chair I have the chair doesn't have a report um other than to thank you for your confidence in me I suppose um all right Chris report of staff oh I would just like to report that I'm very pleased that we had our reorganization and our elections and I'm very pleased with the people who were nominated and elected so thank you all for agreeing to serve okay all right so the time is 1014 and we may adjourn thank you all for staying with us good night thank you yeah feel better Nate hey Chris thanks you're welcome thank you good night thanks everybody good night Pam okay mr marshall good night